The federal government’s ‘public health emergency’ over Covid-19 is set to end May 11 – but the U.S. still imposes a vaccine requirement on foreign travelers. This makes no sense.
- There’s no meaningful effect on virus spread by requiring foreign visitors to the U.S. to be vaccinated against Covid-19.
- And the government will no longer consider Covid-19 an emergency in any case.
The new CDC requirement calls a single dose of a bivalent vaccine taken since August 16, 2022 “full vaccination” for purposes of non-residents entering the country. There should no longer be any such requirement, just as most of the rest of the world has lifted requirements too. It’s absurd that they are changing the requirement now, not eliminating it, given what the science says.
When Covid-19 vaccines were first introduced, they were far more effective against infection and spread of the virus than they are today because they were much better matched to the actual virus that was spreading and because that virus didn’t spread as effectively as it has muted to spread today. Indeed, by the time vaccine formulas were updated they were (1) updated to a variant that was no longer dominant, and (2) still half targeted to the ancestral Wuhan strain of the virus.
While there’s strong hope that nasal vaccines under development as boosters will be sterilizing such that they will prevent not just symptoms but actual infection and therefore spread, there’s no longer as much interest in fast-tracking as there was under Operation Warp Speed.
When vaccine requirements were first introduced, there was an argument that they would help reduce spread. They didn’t do this, because they weren’t part of a comprehensive program that might have been effective. They did not apply to U.S. citizens. And Congress didn’t legislate them in other contexts. When unmasked, unvaccinated Americans could congregate without limits in bars in many states foreigners were at greater risk of contracting Covid-19 once here than bringing it into the country (and, of course, it was already here and spreading whether they did so or not).
The restrictions imposed by the U.S. were performative. They were not sufficient to influence the course of the virus, and thus did not on their own make sense when instituted. Now that the government no longer even considers this a public health emergency it’s absurd that restrictions remain in place.
@ Ravindra
” I don’t know anybody, who got such kind of vaccination since August 16, 2022″
Dude, the entry rules refer to primary vaccination courses. Maybe Gary Leff MD should have explained the basics rather than stir the pot….
@ Gary Leff
“funny, you don’t articulate what you believe the public health benefit is that justifies that restriction. Doing so would, of course, subject your claim to scrutiny over whether the policy actually accomplishes the goal.”
Funny you don’t cite any medical or scientific literature to validate any claims in your article. Doing so would, of course, would reveal your medical and scientific pontifications to be nothing more substantial than clickbait. Your article – your responsibility to quote your sources in peer reviewed literature. Until you do that, Gary, you continue to be a fake.
Now see my response to @ Curious Cat above, which cites an actual report…;)
And the winning comment in this high noise, low signal “debate” is….@platy’s because it is all signal and no noise!
@CuriousCat:
> We can *only* count the numbers of actual deaths as *factual*! Note that the current global trends with abnormally higher Excess Mortality numbers after massive jabbing give rise to *real* concerns about a totally *different* type of side-effect from those jabs!
Despite the eternal attempts to hide reality it’s obvious what’s going on: Covid can kill without being recorded as a Covid death. Covid causes clotting and clots floating around in your blood stream has long been known to be very dangerous. One gets in your brain: stroke. One gets in your heart: heart attack. One gets in your lungs: pulmonary embolism. All three of these can be quick kills where you never are sent to the hospital.
There are countries with universal medical records, loved by researchers because they make studying actual patterns so much easier. If the vaccines were causing deaths they would stand out like a sore thumb–but in practice we see a higher death rate amongst the unvaccinated.
> This manifestation might also help to explain the endless confusions surrounding whether “asymptomatic” spreading of SARS-CoV-2 among the populace can occur — totally *ironic* that those jabs could actually exacerbate incidents of being infected and spreading to others by “masking” the very symptoms that would have indicated infection (and, hence, encourage taking precautions against exposing to others)!
Once again, an attempt to muddy the waters. The reality is most Covid spread is before symptoms show, whether they show symptoms later has very little bearing on how it spreads.
@chopsticks:
> are still unwilling to accept the scientific fact that ALL OF THE COVID VACCINES HAVE BEEN COMPLETE FAILURES. The only proven “benefit” to the initial doses was to DELAY your susceptibility to Covid. There is plenty of evidence (albeit difficult to completely prove, because the gov’t has refused to collect and/or publish the data — that you later became MORE susceptible to Covid!
Strangely enough such research never makes off the pre-print servers because it can’t stand up to scrutiny. And it’s been the red states that refuse to collect data.
The reality is that death rate amongst the unvaccinated is well above the death rate amongst the vaccinated once you match like patients. (This is another source for producing false “research”–high risk patients are more likely to be vaccinated and were vaccinated earlier. When you compare high risk vaccinated patients with low risk unvaccinated you get a false picture.)
@CuriousCat:
> So you think that those jabs have been safe and effective? And you want small children (ages less than 9) to get multiple jabs, when their COVID-19 Infection Fatality Rate averages around 0.002%? Do life-long adverse side-effects from those jabs matter for those small children?
And what about the life long adverse reactions from Covid infection? Just because someone survives doesn’t mean they escaped unharmed. And where are these life-long effects from the vaccines?
@James N
> derek is the perfect example of someone so consumed by the propaganda, he believes everything spit out by the “experts”. Honestly, most people know at this point that those Covid death numbers are simply fiction.
No. Many (not most) people want to believe the Covid death numbers are fiction. Trump saw it disproportionately hitting blue areas and pretended it wasn’t an issue which set the tone even as we learned otherwise. (It started out blue because people in blue areas travel more.)
@1KBrad
> Died OF Covid or died WITH Covid?
Another standard deception from the deniers. We are seeing more excess deaths than we are seeing deaths labeled “Covid”–because they don’t get diagnosed. Rarely do you have a death where they had Covid but it had no bearing on the situation.
@CuriousCat
> Based on what *proof*? Just because you claim that mRNA jabs are “safe and effective” does *not*, therefore, mean that they are so! You should read up on the *prolific* scientific medical studies that have *now debunked* legacy “safety” and “effectiveness” claims by Big Pharma!
There has been a prolific amount of garbage spewed by those who want to deny the reality but it doesn’t make them true. Again and again studies come out and are quickly demolished for misuse of data.
> Furthermore, let’s look at the recorded adverse side effects from COVID-19 jabs vs. legacy non-COVID-19 *true* vaccines (from 2021 state of West Australia Vaccine Safety Surveillance Report) —
Non-COVID-19 …………………….. 11.1 adverse events/100,000 doses
COVID-19 …………………………….. 264.1 adverse events/100,000 doses
You need to look at what an “adverse event” actually means. Most are pretty minor.
> Did you know that Pfizer even noted in its internal documents that 97 children had died after getting its jabs?
Well, duh, I’m surprised it’s that low. People die. That doesn’t mean the 97 died **from the jab**. Kids typically die by trauma. It still gets reported.
> There is the claim that 1.6 million perished due to COVID-19, but you should be researching how many of those were *not* directly due to COVID-19, itself, but were *actually* the results of the ultimate worst-case adverse side effect (ie, death) from getting jabbed with *ineffective* and *unsafe* products from the likes of Pfizer and Moderna, among others
Amazing how powerful they are to have killed a third of a million people before they even existed! I had no idea vaccines had time travel capability.
You call yourself “curious” but you are showing no curiosity at all, but mindless swallowing of the denier garbage.
@platy
——–
“So make some attempt to read the report, pay attention to the definition of terms, and take a critical look at the data. … I’m getting a vaccine that will protect myself and vulnerable members of my community from serious illness and death and I’m running around like a gormless twat worried about a post vaccine jab and keeping themselves *safe* from a headache or localised rash that occurs at a rate of a fraction of one percent. *Snowflake* redefined thanks to the dumb right wing Americans and their insane conspiracy theories. … If you want an adult discussion, try citing the serious adverse event data….they are orders of magnitude less. … The dumb-right-wing-American commentariat above fails to grasp such.” –>
———————————————————————
Kinda “Curious” that, in your haste to engage in ad hominem attacks upon a significant portion of Americans, you seem to somehow have forgotten about the actual core message being presented with those numbers from WA — that there is a *huge* discrepancy within both the reported regular adverse events and special interest adverse events when comparing non-COVID-19 injections vs. COVID-19 jabs. Note that, IFF properly collected, the *same* definitions of what constitutes both categories of adverse events should apply equally to *both* categories of injections, and, therefore, what is left should be that there is *still* a huge discrepancy in reported incidences… which should *not* be normal when comparing relative *safety* profiles for each category of those injections!
Comparison of non-COVID-19 injections vs. COVID-19 jabs per special interest adverse events —
Anaphylaxis — 30X increase of incidents
Thrombo*** — 57X increase
Guillain-Barre — 16X increase
Myocarditis — 98X increase
Myopericarditis — 0 cases to 48 in samples
Pericarditis — 0 cases to 402 in samples
While the base #cases may seem small, at that point in time, those reports were relatively recent after jabs, and time has now shown that many of the more serious side effects (eg, serious cases of blood clots, increased excess incidents of other diseases such as cancer, etc) take time to manifest to significant degrees (many months to a year or more). So how do you *know* that those seriously increased #incidences will not presage later manifestations of much more serious consequences upon people’s bodies? To compound matters, there has been a *huge* penchant (or else implied “mandate”) to *not* conduct thorough and proper autopsies of those deaths that *might* be even remotely suspected to be associated with those jabs — thus we have that syndrome of “Don’t Look … Don’t Find” that can totally *skew* (in the favorable direction) those purported “safety” statistics for COVID-19 jabs. Even the idea of a post-pandemic Australian governmental *inquiry* into those jabs (from safety and policy perspectives), as well as potential relationships to increased annual excess mortality rates, have been blocked from taking place. Just *what* are “they” afraid of finding out about longer-term direct and cross consequences of those jabs? One wonders whether any agency in the Australian government is now even trying to collect data on those serious long-term consequences for future correlation and causation evaluations?
With respect to your insinuation that those jabs “… protect myself and vulnerable members of my community from serious illness and death …”, that is a claim that is universally made by pro-vaxers, but without consideration for how long that “protection” lasts (even declining into negative VE territory in a matter of a few months) and what their long-term consequences are (eg, jab ingredients adversely impacting continued proper immunity and disease fighting functions of human bodies, as well as potentially influencing those alarmingly increased annual excess mortality rates). It is *very* suspicious, when so many governments worldwide disavow *proven* safe and effective therapeutic *treatments* against COVID-19 and *mandate* that everyone *must,* instead, get jabbed … just so that Big Pharma can get that coveted EUA from the US FDA and then rake in endless US$BILLIONS in profits from selling their jabs worldwide!
I don’t know if you’ve personally experienced any “Sudden Deaths” of those fully jabbed within your family, relatives, or friends, but I have friends here who have experienced *multiple* such losses across multiple individual families! It’s so “trivial” to just ascribe some “low #occurrences” in those data as not being statistically significant … until it hits “home” with your own family members, relatives, or friends!
Hopefully you have *not* had to experience such losses, but TRY to keep such REALITIES in mind when you go off on your TOTALLY HYPOCRITICAL (being an “adult”?) AD HOMINEM ATTACKS against others who happen to *disagree* with your SELF-RIGHTEOUS VIEWS about what “Science” MUST be, rather than engaging in any sort of CIVIL DEBATES or DISCUSSIONS about *differences* on such matters!
Has “Science” really now been reduced to such UNCIVIL behaviors? YOU MUST DO BETTER … for the best image of your own country that you represent!
“No. Many (not most) people want to believe the Covid death numbers are fiction.”
I’m sorry, you’re correct. I should have written, “most people who are “informed”, know the truth about those death figures”.
You know things are reaching the limit when a openly Dem admits that the ppl currently running the Greatest country on earth are clowns.
@Loren
———————————————————————
“We can *only* count the numbers of actual deaths as *factual*! … Covid can kill without being recorded as a Covid death. … If the vaccines were causing deaths they would stand out like a sore thumb–but in practice we see a higher death rate amongst the unvaccinated.”
——–
Totally agree that “we can only count actual deaths as *factual*” … but, when COVID-19 deaths can occur without being recorded as COVID-19 deaths, those counts can quickly become suspect for comprehensiveness and accuracy. Similarly, after deaths occur, it is critical to assess what actually caused those deaths (whether COVID-19-related or jab-related) for future epidemiological evaluations; however, in order to try and ascertain jab-related situations, enhanced autopsy procedures must be used, as normal autopsy methods will *not* be able to detect such. On this issue we are facing a serious uphill struggle, as there has been great reluctance worldwide to even do normal autopsies, much less enhanced ones! So the statistics being reported by various government agencies are *incomplete,* at best!
With respect to that legacy claim about seeing a “… higher death rate amongst the unvaccinated,” that claim, if from the US, has traditionally over-estimated deaths for the unvaccinated category because, for suspicious reasons, CDC considers one to become vaccinated *only after* at least 1 week after the 2nd jab has been received. Therefore, all deaths among those who got the 1st jab, but not yet the 2nd jab, are thrown into the unvaccinated category. So we need to look at NHS data from the UK for more realistic data. While there were situations where those jabbed experienced lower death rates than those unvaccinated during June, 2021, this situation totally flipped by June, 2022, so that death rates for those jabbed had already exceeded those unvaccinated!
———————————————————————
” The reality is most Covid spread is before symptoms show, whether they show symptoms later has very little bearing on how it spreads.”
——–
OK … so you *do* agree that asymptomatic spreading actually occurs. That’s what I was trying to “justify” as well.
———————————————————————
“And what about the life long adverse reactions from Covid infection? Just because someone survives doesn’t mean they escaped unharmed. And where are these life-long effects from the vaccines?”
——–
I’m *not* saying that reactions from COVID-19 infections do *not* incur life-long adverse reactions … instead, I’m saying that getting jabbed but *not* subsequently getting infected can *still* incur life-long adverse reactions, which should *not* occur, IFF those jabs were truly *safe*! Do you consider the now CDC-confessed causation of ***carditis from jabs to potentially be life-long effects? If the patient dies from ***carditis, does that constitute “life”-long after that life got terminated due to that side effect? Shouldn’t researchers be seriously investigating all of those “Sudden Deaths” that have now been recurring worldwide among those fully jabbed, but were so much less occurring in the past before those jabs existed?
———————————————————————
“There has been a prolific amount of garbage spewed by those who want to deny the reality but it doesn’t make them true. Again and again studies come out and are quickly demolished for misuse of data.”
——–
Uh … “deny the reality” from which side?
———————————————————————
“You need to look at what an “adverse event” actually means. Most are pretty minor.”
——–
Look at my prior reply post (above) to @platy about this issue.
———————————————————————
“Well, duh, I’m surprised it’s that low. People die. That doesn’t mean the 97 died **from the jab**. Kids typically die by trauma. It still gets reported.”
——–
But, if I recall correctly, those 97 were reported as “consequences” from its clinical trial results that Pfizer indicated were related to their jabs. While this raw number may appear to be “low” we need to know the total cohort size before proclaiming its “insignificance”. Furthermore, as I had indicated above, enhanced autopsies are necessary in order to assess whether jabs had impacts upon deaths … and there has been tremendous reluctance to do such enhanced autopsies, so we have that syndrome of “Don’t Look … Don’t Find” … so much for comprehensive scientific research!
———————————————————————
“Amazing how powerful they are to have killed a third of a million people before they even existed! I had no idea vaccines had time travel capability.”
——–
Huh? Where / How did you draw the impression that I claimed those jabs “… have killed a third of a million people before they even existed”? What? ???
———————————————————————
“You call yourself “curious” but you are showing no curiosity at all, but mindless swallowing of the denier garbage.”
——–
ROFLMAO! On the other hand, I can *also* claim that you *must* present as a pro-vaxer for fear of getting *Cancelled* by those “powers that be” … *despite* prolific *new* research results that have now *totally debunked* those out-of-date claims of yore (eg, that those unvaccinated continue to have higher death rates than those fully jabbed)! You might want to update many of your out-of-date beliefs in order to be more in sync with the latest *new* research results!
@platy
“that there is a *huge* discrepancy within both the reported regular adverse events and special interest adverse events when comparing non-COVID-19 injections vs. COVID-19 jabs.”
You are utterly confused in your insane comment. You quoted and then wantonly (presumably ignorantly) misinterpreted the data in your own reference (“adverse events”). You claimed adverse events as an indication of lack of safety. Reality check – they are not. Read the report. You clearly don’t understand the very reference which you cite. That’s sad because some readers sharing your confirmation bias will be attracted to your conspiratorial world view which has zero scientific basis, but hey, over 40% of Americans are creationists and refute evolution even though the virus is evolving in their very noses and airways and they are thereby fundamentally anti-science before the woeful right wing political twits spread their fake news about science and medicine. WTF.
“what constitutes both categories of adverse events should apply equally to *both* categories of injections, and, therefore, what is left should be that there is *still* a huge discrepancy in reported incidences… which should *not* be normal when comparing relative *safety* profiles for each category of those injections!”
Eh? Ya what? Do I really have to spell this out for you?! You are comparing rates of headaches and localised rashes and the like in a potential reaction of a jab in the fractions of a percent. That’s the definition of adverse events in the report. Not my definition. The report. Which you choose to misrepresent. And even when I point this out in my earlier post to you persist in your posting of drivel. Read the report. Read the definitions. Don’t accept my word for it. Read the report!
Serious events are recorded in a few per million.
“Comparison of non-COVID-19 injections vs. COVID-19 jabs per special interest adverse events”
Please, mate. Take a step back and try redefining your argument in terms of serious adverse events instead of adverse events. Your are still misfiring despite my guidance from my earlier posts.
Clue – and then what you should be testing is a comparison between the vaccinated and non vaccinated cohorts for COVID wrt to vaccine effectiveness. The data for a non biased and scientific cost-benefit analysis lies therein – whatever you think, Carlbum Fcuking Tucker, thinks or Gary Leff thinks, it matters not, the data don’t lie, dude. You evidently lack the scientific training to collate, analyse and interpret the data. Clue – you are focusing on an irrelevant line of argument.
“To compound matters, there has been a *huge* penchant (or else implied “mandate”) to *not* conduct thorough and proper autopsies of those deaths that *might* be even remotely suspected to be associated with those jabs — thus we have that syndrome of “Don’t Look … Don’t Find” that can totally *skew* (in the favorable direction) those purported “safety” statistics for COVID-19 jabs”
Seriously, WTF. does your conspiracy theory apply just to the USA or more than the 200 countries with active COVID related healthy policies? Are you going to offer any actual published data for this claim to be adjudged in a rational manner rather than bat shite crazy right wing twat fake reality?
“Even the idea of a post-pandemic Australian governmental *inquiry* into those jabs (from safety and policy perspectives), as well as potential relationships to increased annual excess mortality rates, have been blocked from taking place.”
Justify your claim – that means cite the evidence.
“without consideration for how long that “protection” lasts (even declining into negative VE territory in a matter of a few months) and what their long-term consequences are”
USA data versus Australian data on COVID mortality leave your illogical rant worthless.
“It is *very* suspicious, when so many governments worldwide disavow *proven* safe and effective therapeutic *treatments* against COVID-19 and *mandate* that everyone *must,* instead, get jabbed”
Yes, absolutely, if you are prone to belief in unproven conspiracy theories and choose to misrepresent the health policy of countless jurisdictions. Sadly, you are living in a fantasy world, dude.
” just so that Big Pharma can get that coveted EUA from the US FDA and then rake in endless US$BILLIONS in profits from selling their jabs worldwide!”
Surely a terrible example of capitalist extremes – unless, of course, vaccines are effective in managing the pandemic at a national level.
“I don’t know if you’ve personally experienced any “Sudden Deaths” of those fully jabbed within your family, relatives, or friends, but I have friends here who have experienced *multiple* such losses across multiple individual families!”
No, I haven’t . And I don’t have a single friend, or work colleague or relative who claims such. Such cases would be tragic.
“It’s so “trivial” to just ascribe some “low #occurrences” in those data as not being statistically significant … until it hits “home” with your own family members, relatives, or friends!”
True. But whereas I know nobody who has had a verified serious vaccine reaction of any kind, I do know of people who died of COVID and I have friends who are front line ER medics who served in hot zones from NYC to Iran who regard comments such as yours and certain others herein as utterly deluded. Are the deaths of this people who know who died of COVID more or less *trivial*?
“Hopefully you have *not* had to experience such losses”
Yep – those who died of COVID.
” with your SELF-RIGHTEOUS VIEWS about what “Science” MUST be, rather than engaging in any sort of CIVIL DEBATES or DISCUSSIONS about *differences* on such matters!”
Small problem, dude, a couple of us on this blog are highly trained *scientists* and have some cfuking clue what we are talking about and we are totally over the illogical, misinformed, unscientific and highly derogatory insult of idiots inferring that the whole medical / scientific community is in some nefarious global conspiracy – your post and those of certain others herein are profoundly insulting in that regard.
l
Has “Science” really now been reduced to such UNCIVIL behaviors? YOU MUST DO BETTER … for the best image of your own country that you represent!
@ CuriousCat
“when COVID-19 deaths can occur without being recorded as COVID-19 deaths, those counts can quickly become suspect for comprehensiveness and accurate”
In that event the true death rate from COVID would be HIGHER than the quoted data – which kind undermines your conspiratorial argument. It debunks it.
“however, in order to try and ascertain jab-related situations, enhanced autopsy procedures must be used, as normal autopsy methods will *not* be able to detect such.”
If you are implying that we might confuse jab related rather than actual COVID deaths, you have serious problem – the former have different pathologies to the latter.
“On this issue we are facing a serious uphill struggle, as there has been great reluctance worldwide to even do normal autopsies, much less enhanced ones! So the statistics being reported by various government agencies are *incomplete,* at best!”
Well, you better let the National Association of Medical Examiners in the USA and every equivalent professional body in every country globally know that their procedures are professionally derelict. Incidentally, establishing the presence of COVID virus-related proteins in the system is a trivial task.
“So we need to look at NHS data from the UK for more realistic data. While there were situations where those jabbed experienced lower death rates than those unvaccinated during June, 2021, this situation totally flipped by June, 2022, so that death rates for those jabbed had already exceeded those unvaccinated!”
Dude, come back to us when you have any comprehension of what we mean scientifically by a “confounding variable”. Unfortunately to be brutal, but until then, you are wasting the time of myself and every other reader of this blog. Cherry picking data which you personally perceive to be an advocation of your personal bias isn’t science – hint – you have to establish cause and effect and you can only do that if you take count of all the factors in play (hint – differential vaccine protocols, differential age courts, under-reporting of mortality in aged care facilities in the UK, etc). .
“OK … so you *do* agree that asymptomatic spreading actually occurs. That’s what I was trying to “justify” as well.”
Dude, do you fully understand the concept of an “R” number? Sadly, without such, any discussion cannot elevate out of the swamp.
“I’m *not* saying that reactions from COVID-19 infections do *not* incur life-long adverse reactions”
And yet you have self-defined relatively trivial “adverse reactions” as “unsafe” out of the context of the long term impact on the individual of long COVID symptoms (that some regulars herein even deny exist). Are you aware of the hypocrisy in your position?
” … instead, I’m saying that getting jabbed but *not* subsequently getting infected can *still* incur life-long adverse reactions, which should *not* occur, IFF those jabs were truly *safe*!”
That claim demands evidence. Provide it. When you do, be sure to let us know how you are sure that the cited dataset for jabbed but never infected is robust (that cohort has never been exposed to the COVID virus – good luck with that!).
“Do you consider the now CDC-confessed causation of ***carditis from jabs to potentially be life-long effects? If the patient dies from ***carditis, does that constitute “life”-long after that life got terminated due to that side effect?”
Eh? There are known side effects of the jabs. Nobody herein is denying that. Nobody is saying that jabs are 100% without side effects. I personally refused and encouraged my wife to refuse to be vaccinated with the Astra Zeneca vaccine – that particular vaccine has since been shelved in some countries including the UK and Australia. The mature debate has a focus on benefit versus cost. In your posts you have confused the incidence of side effects with serious side effects – it’s a very big difference.
For your conspiracy theories to hold-up to scrutiny you would have to present data confirming that serious side effects such as myocarditis are significantly higher than the medically recognised indices of such events. Like, shite times higher!
“Shouldn’t researchers be seriously investigating all of those “Sudden Deaths” that have now been recurring worldwide among those fully jabbed, but were so much less occurring in the past before those jabs existed?”
It seems that in your view of a pervasively conspiratorial world that none of them do (?). It may news to you, dude, but governments do try to apply appropriate public health policy predicated on medical science.
“There has been a prolific amount of garbage spewed by those who want to deny the reality but it doesn’t make them true.”
Undoubtedly the case. And yet, most online commentary and commentary by certain media and certain political parties is utterly derelict in its scientific / medical credentials.
“Again and again studies come out and are quickly demolished for misuse of data.”
Dude, in science studies are subject to a peer review process. It’s a check and balance process. You have yourself misquoted a report (WA one). That wasn’t even a paper from a peer reviewed journal, rather a repot to government to inform health policy.
“But, if I recall correctly, those 97 were reported as “consequences” from its clinical trial results that Pfizer indicated were related to their jabs”
Be careful to distinguished between “efficacy” and “effectiveness”. Come back when you have that clear in your mind.
Incidentally, for very rare events (serious adverse reactions) you need HUGE numbers of data points to determine a statistically valid estimate of such events in the population. This isn’t scientist and governments being sneaky – it’s statistical reality. Some back to us when you have your brain around that one.
“ROFLMAO! On the other hand, I can *also* claim that you *must* present as a pro-vaxer for fear of getting *Cancelled* by those “powers that be”
Whereas this comment was directed at somebody else, in my own case I have absolutely no fear of being cancelled. FWIW I’ve stood up to orthodoxy in my past field of scientific research on the basis of the undeniable power of a robust analysis of well collected data. Well trained scientists are not fools, dude. You are ridiculously insulting in inferring such.
” … *despite* prolific *new* research results that have now *totally debunked* those out-of-date claims of yore (eg, that those unvaccinated continue to have higher death rates than those fully jabbed)! You might want to update many of your out-of-date beliefs in order to be more in sync with the latest *new* research results!”
OK, dude, come back to us when you illustrate the most basic competencies of a scientific approach (as invited at various points in the above – confounding variables, multivariate analysis, dynamic systems analysis, R numbers in epidemiology, peer-reviewed publication process, null hypotheses, statistical significance, analysis of very rate events, definitions of adverse reactions, etc etc). regrettably, without these basics and despite an evident very admirable interest you display in the subject, we can’t have an informed debate….;)
CDC Should ignore congress and continue enforcing the mandate indefinitely.
@CuriousCat:
> Comparison of non-COVID-19 injections vs. COVID-19 jabs per special interest adverse events —
The problem here is that you are comparing vaccination to nothing when you should be comparing it to infection. Nobody would be administering vaccines if there wasn’t a threat to defend against.
> To compound matters, there has been a *huge* penchant (or else implied “mandate”) to *not* conduct thorough and proper autopsies of those deaths that *might* be even remotely suspected to be associated with those jabs
No, the don’t-look applies to likely Covid deaths.
> Even the idea of a post-pandemic Australian governmental *inquiry* into those jabs (from safety and policy perspectives), as well as potential relationships to increased annual excess mortality rates, have been blocked from taking place.
Well, duh, there’s no reason for it. You’re taking it as evidence of a problem when they fail to consider the water is dry hypothesis. Well, duh, the death rate jumped in Australia after the vaccines. Because after the vaccines they opened up and Covid started killing people!
> It is *very* suspicious, when so many governments worldwide disavow *proven* safe and effective therapeutic *treatments* against COVID-19
Except they are neither safe nor effective. A few seriously flawed studies found a benefit and the deniers jumped on it. Every properly-done study found them useless.
> I don’t know if you’ve personally experienced any “Sudden Deaths” of those fully jabbed within your family, relatives, or friends, but I have friends here who have experienced *multiple* such losses across multiple individual families!
Amazing how it’s only the deniers that keep encountering these sudden deaths. Doesn’t that suggest that either they’re bogus or it’s due to not being vaccinated?
> While there were situations where those jabbed experienced lower death rates than those unvaccinated during June, 2021, this situation totally flipped by June, 2022, so that death rates for those jabbed had already exceeded those unvaccinated!
As I have pointed out the vaccinated tend to be older and sicker than the unvaccinated. You need to compare equal populations.
> I’m *not* saying that reactions from COVID-19 infections do *not* incur life-long adverse reactions … instead, I’m saying that getting jabbed but *not* subsequently getting infected can *still* incur life-long adverse reactions, which should *not* occur, IFF those jabs were truly *safe*!
You are treating “safe” as the same thing as “effective”. And you are only considering something “effective” if it provides a 100% cure.
> ROFLMAO! On the other hand, I can *also* claim that you *must* present as a pro-vaxer for fear of getting *Cancelled* by those “powers that be” … *despite* prolific *new* research results that have now *totally debunked* those out-of-date claims of yore (eg, that those unvaccinated continue to have higher death rates than those fully jabbed)! You might want to update many of your out-of-date beliefs in order to be more in sync with the latest *new* research results!
I pay attention to actual research, not the stuff reported in places like Faux Noise. Remember that $787 million settlement they just made because they keep promoting the party line even when they know they’re lying? It’s normally very hard to win a defamation case against a public entity like that but Dominion had them solid. And there’s plenty of other suits behind that they’re also going to lose.
@platy:
> Well, you better let the National Association of Medical Examiners in the USA and every equivalent professional body in every country globally know that their procedures are professionally derelict. Incidentally, establishing the presence of COVID virus-related proteins in the system is a trivial task.
The system doesn’t work as well as we would like it to. Where he’s going wrong is in thinking they’re missing vaccine deaths while what they are actually missing are Covid deaths.
> “There has been a prolific amount of garbage spewed by those who want to deny the reality but it doesn’t make them true.”
Please be more careful with your quotes–you’re attributing a lot of words to him that were mine.
@platy
———————————————————————
“You are utterly confused in your insane comment. You quoted and then wantonly (presumably ignorantly) misinterpreted the data in your own reference (“adverse events”). You claimed adverse events as an indication of lack of safety. Reality check – they are not. Read the report. You clearly don’t understand the very reference which you cite.” … “Please, mate. Take a step back and try redefining your argument in terms of serious adverse events instead of adverse events.”
——–
OK … let me clarify what I did, and then you tell me how to do it better —
#1. I looked at the definitions of terms relating to AEFI, SAEFI, and AESI. The AEFI symptoms are, indeed, probably not of serious concern, so the SAEFI symptoms are what actually matter. AESI symptoms bear further watching.
#2. There are lots of data about AEFI, which we agree should be skipped. But I have *not* been able to find any specific embedded data (tables or graphs) regarding SAEFI within that report. Where are those? I then went to the [ ausvaxsafety.org.au ] website and looked at safety reports for a variety of listed jabs by brands, but there were *no* references to SAEFI in those, either! So, not finding any SAEFI data, I decided to look at AESI, as there are data presented for that, with side effects that appear to be serious in nature. I do, of course, agree that focusing on data regarding SAEFI will be most proper, but I haven’t found any specific embedded SAEFI data within either that report or on the [ ausvaxsafety.org.au ] website.
#3. So … where can one access actual data on SAEFI for COVID-19 jabs? Or are “they” suggesting that there are *no* SAEFI issues that got captured? If so, how does that square with the serious symptoms listed under AESI that actually manifest in the real world to jabbed recipients, and with demonstrated serious consequences?
#4. Without available specific data regarding SAEFI, why is it so improper to look at AESI, instead? Are you suggesting that AESI symptoms are *not* actually real and, therefore, do *not* warrant any concerns? ???
———————————————————————
“… what you should be testing is a comparison between the vaccinated and non vaccinated cohorts for COVID wrt to vaccine effectiveness.”
——–
That’s a different discussion, as I’m interested in the *safety* of those jabs, in this current thread!
———————————————————————
“You evidently lack the scientific training to collate, analyse and interpret the data. Clue – you are focusing on an irrelevant line of argument.”
——–
So, in your mind, jab *safety* is totally *irrelevant* and the *only* consideration of significance is jab *effectiveness*? ???
———————————————————————
“… does your conspiracy theory apply just to the USA or more than the 200 countries with active COVID related healthy policies?”
——–
So ask yourself — just *how many* proper autopsies have actually been done on those who suspiciously died “suddenly” … to even *try* and ascertain potential causes of death? Just as one example of what I’m referring to —
https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/italian-doctor-suspended-for-suggesting
———————————————————————
“Justify your claim – that means cite the evidence.”
——–
I was originally thinking of a recent class action law suit, with 500 members and led by Dr. Melissa McCann, against the Australian government accusing cover-up and censorship, and seeks compensation for those “allegedly” injured by those COVID-19 jabs —
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/australian-covid-vaccine-injury-class-action-lawsuit/
But I must have confused the case above with another issue that is still ongoing regarding the Australian government undertaking a post-COVID-19 inquiry into prior handling and policies.
———————————————————————
“USA data versus Australian data on COVID mortality leave your illogical rant worthless”
——–
You *do* understand that USA has intentionally *over*-stated #deaths of those unjabbed vs. those jabbed, right? That a person is *still* considered to be “unvaccinated” until 2 weeks *after* receiving the 2nd jab? Do you believe that a negative VE has *any* effects upon one’s increased susceptibility to get infected and subsequently become impacted (whether injured, disabled, or dead) from that resulting infection?
———————————————————————
“Yes, absolutely, if you are prone to belief in unproven conspiracy theories and choose to misrepresent the health policy of countless jurisdictions.”
——–
Do you understand the *real* reasons *why* the USA’s CDC and FDA were “mandated” to declare those proven safe and effective anti-COVID-19 therapeutics as “not approved”? Do you understand how the EUA process works in USA? Do you understand *why* all those governments worldwide were basically required to follow whatever the USA’s CDC and FDA “mandated”? ———————————————————————
“Surely a terrible example of capitalist extremes – unless, of course, vaccines are effective in managing the pandemic at a national level.”
——–
So let’s see … the CDC has confessed that those COVID-19 jabs do *not* prevent infections and do *not* prevent spreading, as originally sold to the public in USA. All that they actually do, is to try and “mitigate” the severity of symptoms from actual infections … *but,* in that process, those jabs *also* happen to damage your body’s inherent immune system and make you even more vulnerable to suffering other, previously managed diseases that are now “mysteriously” recurring … I guess that’s what you consider “managing”? And then there’s this tidbit —
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/game-over-medicare-data-shows-the
———————————————————————
“Are the deaths of this people who know who died of COVID more or less *trivial*?”
——–
Stop engaging in “bait and switch” on this issue! I’m talking about people dying suddenly *after* getting jabbed (which the “Establishment” refuses to investigate) … so *what* does my statement have to do with those who died directly from COVID-19? Did I say that people do *not* die from COVID-19? Nice try, but *no* cigars for you!
———————————————————————
“… a couple of us on this blog are highly trained *scientists* and have some cfuking clue what we are talking about and we are totally over the illogical, misinformed, unscientific and highly derogatory insult of idiots inferring that the whole medical / scientific community is in some nefarious global conspiracy – your post and those of certain others herein are profoundly insulting in that regard.”
——–
Wow! Such self-righteous indignation from someone who (mandatorily?) maintains a *closed mind* about *any* alternative perspectives that do *not* toe the “Establishment” positions … even when those positions have been *proven* to be *totally wrong* — extreme fear of getting *cancelled* by that same “Establishment” must truly be intimidating!
———————————————————————
My responses to your other subsequent reply post coming later …
@CuriousCat:
> So … where can one access actual data on SAEFI for COVID-19 jabs? Or are “they” suggesting that there are *no* SAEFI issues that got captured? If so, how does that square with the serious symptoms listed under AESI that actually manifest in the real world to jabbed recipients, and with demonstrated serious consequences?
Claiming they have been observed doesn’t mean they really have been.
> So, in your mind, jab *safety* is totally *irrelevant* and the *only* consideration of significance is jab *effectiveness*? ???
I don’t see anyone saying safety doesn’t matter. Rather, we are saying that safety must be looked at from a broad perspective–what is the risk from Covid vs what is the risk of getting vaccinated then Covid. And given the real-world data on Covid (few countries have had a fatality rate below 1 in 1,000 people) the vaccine could be vastly more risky than anything on the market and yet still be a good idea. Vaccines are typically at the range of 1 death per tens of millions of doses.
> So ask yourself — just *how many* proper autopsies have actually been done on those who suspiciously died “suddenly” … to even *try* and ascertain potential causes of death? Just as one example of what I’m referring to —
Strangely enough all the hits I’m finding on this guy are either from denier sites or not in English. (And the lack of mention elsewhere strongly suggests quack.)
However, his issue is with adult sudden death–do you not realize that Covid can present as sudden death? Your evidence for “vaccine” harm is really Covid!
> I was originally thinking of a recent class action law suit, with 500 members and led by Dr. Melissa McCann, against the Australian government accusing cover-up and censorship, and seeks compensation for those “allegedly” injured by those COVID-19 jabs —
A lawsuit is evidence?! There’s a reason why the US went to a system where vaccine injury claims go before a medical panel rather than the courts–because the false-positive rate for lawsuits in vaccine cases is awfully close to 100%.
> You *do* understand that USA has intentionally *over*-stated #deaths of those unjabbed vs. those jabbed, right? That a person is *still* considered to be “unvaccinated” until 2 weeks *after* receiving the 2nd jab? Do you believe that a negative VE has *any* effects upon one’s increased susceptibility to get infected and subsequently become impacted (whether injured, disabled, or dead) from that resulting infection?
Foul! You haven’t established the negative VE rate, you don’t get to base a claim on it. And the reason we don’t count them as vaccinated is that it takes time for vaccines to work. And the vaccine has been pretty widely available for two years now, two weeks out of that would be 2% of the cases–but the excess death data shows we are **undercounting** by about 20% not counting those who would have died anyway so the real undercount is even higher.
> Do you understand the *real* reasons *why* the USA’s CDC and FDA were “mandated” to declare those proven safe and effective anti-COVID-19 therapeutics as “not approved”? Do you understand how the EUA process works in USA? Do you understand *why* all those governments worldwide were basically required to follow whatever the USA’s CDC and FDA “mandated”?
They were banned because they clearly only did harm, not provide benefit.
> Stop engaging in “bait and switch” on this issue! I’m talking about people dying suddenly *after* getting jabbed (which the “Establishment” refuses to investigate) … so *what* does my statement have to do with those who died directly from COVID-19? Did I say that people do *not* die from COVID-19? Nice try, but *no* cigars for you!
You keep trying to blame the sudden deaths on the vaccine–if that really were the case why would the death rate in the demographically-matched population of unvaccinated be a lot higher than amongst the vaccinated?
> Wow! Such self-righteous indignation from someone who (mandatorily?) maintains a *closed mind* about *any* alternative perspectives that do *not* toe the “Establishment” positions … even when those positions have been *proven* to be *totally wrong* — extreme fear of getting *cancelled* by that same “Establishment” must truly be intimidating!
We aren’t closed-minded. It’s just we pay attention to evidence. There simply is no way to maintain a conspiracy on the scale required for your claims to be true. Let’s consider one of the scariest things that has been in the shadows–the actions of the K-129. The circumstances for secrecy are pretty much ideal as it went down with all hands, but even then there have been plenty of ominous bits that have leaked. Your conspiracies require tens of thousands of people at a minimum.
@ CuriousCat says:
” AESI symptoms bear further watching.”
Focus on serious events. Nobody cares about your paranoia about your headaches or rashes.
“But I have *not* been able to find any specific embedded data (tables or graphs) regarding SAEFI within that report. ”
It’s in the report, read it. Serious events in the few per million. The data is right in front of your nose.
” then went to the [ ausvaxsafety.org.au ] website”
In which WA deaths total 11. the data is right in front of you.
“oOr are “they” suggesting that there are *no* SAEFI issues that got captured?”
The data is right there in front of you – you missed it.
“Without available specific data regarding SAEFI, why is it so improper to look at AESI, instead”
We’re saving lives not headaches and rashes.
“I’m interested in the *safety* of those jabs, in this current thread!”
Your definition of safety is headaches and rashes. Not mine. I want to know why over one million Americans died of COVID. They denialism in your posts helps to explain why.
“So, in your mind, jab *safety* is totally *irrelevant* and the *only* consideration of significance is jab *effectiveness*?”
Read my post – balance benefit versus cost.
“So ask yourself — just *how many* proper autopsies have actually been done”
Question the likelihood that professionals across 200 plus countries are in a conspiracy to satisfy your delusion.
“I was originally thinking of a recent class action law suit,”
Science and law are not the same – different burden of proof (hint – science is greater).
“led by Dr. Melissa McCann”
Who does wrinkles and cosmetic work and has a history of seeking publicity. Look her up, dude. Some 251 supported her crowdfunded page – clearly a global agent of change (not) – where’s the USD100,00 odd of cash going?!
,”seeks compensation for those “allegedly” injured by those COVID-19 jabs”
Seeks higher compensation payments (does not prove higher incidence of vaccine serious side effects). Lawyers win either way, when their services are crowdfunded.
“You *do* understand that USA”
I understand that USA has tragic numbers of COVID deaths relative to Australia.
“That a person is *still* considered to be “unvaccinated” until 2 weeks *after* receiving the 2nd jab?”
So what? The immune systems takes that time to kick in.
“Do you believe that a negative VE has *any* effects upon one’s increased susceptibility to get infected and subsequently become impacted (whether injured, disabled, or dead) from that resulting infection?”
The mythology of such has been addressed in the medical / scientific literature. Read it (pubmed.com).
“Do you understand *why* all those governments worldwide were basically required to follow whatever the USA’s CDC and FDA “mandated”?”
Utter nonsense. For example, the Australian vaccine mandates were different to USA. So were those in the UK and other countries.
“So let’s see … ”
Let not. The rest of your post is utter drivel with no substantiating evidence. Provide the scientific references and we’ll listen.
“https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/game-over-medicare-data-shows-the”
I don’t to go to an expert in computer mice and blockchain for my medical needs. Maybe you do?
“Stop engaging in “bait and switch” on this issue! I’m talking about people dying suddenly *after* getting jabbed (which the “Establishment” refuses to investigate)”
It’s actually very simple. You wantonly ignore the upside of vaccines. COVID kills. The overt message was lost on you.
“Wow! Such self-righteous indignation”
An inevitable accusation from somebody who is clearly ignorant on matters upon which the counter commentary is from somebody who has extensive training and experience. Hint – I don’t care what you think of me. That said, if I was debating cockpit protocols with a pilot (which I’m not) I would gladly defer and learn from their greater training, expertise and experience on flying a plane. Not you, apparently.
“from someone who (mandatorily?) maintains a *closed mind* about *any* alternative perspectives”
No. A good scientist always looks for the angle. That’s how science advances.
” extreme fear of getting *cancelled* by that same “Establishment” must truly be intimidating!”
I’m not in the “establishment”. I already told you that. You wild accusations are misplaced and would be potentially insulting to any scientist / medic.