• The TUGBBS forums are completely free and open to the public and exist as the absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 30 years!

    Join Tens of Thousands of other Owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day!
  • TUG started 30 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 30th anniversary: Happy 30th Birthday TUG!
  • TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!

    Free memberships for every 50 subscribers!

    Visit TUG on Youtube!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $21,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $21 Million dollars
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    60,000+ subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners!
  • Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    All T-shirt options here!
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

The Medical Industrial Complex

Superchief

TUG Member
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
3,945
Reaction score
2,843
Points
448
Location
Cincinnati, OH
My comment had nothing to do with mandates or boosters. Just the simple question as to why not get the best protection available? If we did not get it in the first 50 or so times you said it we understand your position. Now try to understand mine. With all the unknowns about both vaccine and natural immunity why would you not want to get the best protection possible. I will go with the much maligned experts that have studied this stuff all their lives. If they say it is an advantage to get a booster or a vaccination along with natural immunity that is what I will do. Protection that could save your life if you get a breakthrough case or allow that great immunity to last longer. Putting all the scare tactics about the vaccine aside please show any data that says the vaccine risk is greater than the dangers of even a natural immunity breakthrough case.
Personally, I would probably wait until my physical next month and get an antibody test and make my decision. I will do the same thing before getting a Moderna booster. I know some people aren't convinced that the booster would help and haven't seen any clinical trials or other substantial research to prove it adds lasting protection. They also are concerned that the FDA hasn't yet fully endorsed the boosters even for Pfizer, and additional studies are currently being done regarding side effects. We really don't go out in crowds very often and socially distance when in public places.
 

GregT

TUG Member
TUG Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,128
Reaction score
1,886
Points
599
Location
Carlsbad, CA
Resorts Owned
Marriott: Maui Ocean Club Lahaina Villas (3BRx5), Ko Olina, Shadow Ridge II, Willow Ridge, Aruba Ocean Club, DC Points HGVC: Flamingo, Sea World, I-Drive, Starwood Bella (x4), SDO, TradeWinds, Worldmark
My comment had nothing to do with mandates or boosters. Just the simple question as to why not get the best protection available? If we did not get it in the first 50 or so times you said it we understand your position. Now try to understand mine. With all the unknowns about both vaccine and natural immunity why would you not want to get the best protection possible. I will go with the much maligned experts that have studied this stuff all their lives. If they say it is an advantage to get a booster or a vaccination along with natural immunity that is what I will do. Protection that could save your life if you get a breakthrough case or allow that great immunity to last longer. Putting all the scare tactics about the vaccine aside please show any data that says the vaccine risk is greater than the dangers of even a natural immunity breakthrough case.
Hello @bluehende ,

It's a good question -- the best protection available is offered by some as a combination of natural immunity plus vax. We have all seen reports that this gives a strong immune response, however it is interesting to contemplate that the best of all might be vaccinated immunity followed by natural infection (could that be nature's booster shot?). Even if you dislike my comments in general, please reflect on this -- a combination of vaccinated immunity for short term protection followed by durable natural immunity due to a break-through infection. This would mean Don is a winner here, assuming mild disease continues, and you all know what a fan of natural immunity that I am.

And I know I repeat myself, but I believe natural immunity alone is sufficiently protective for many people and that adding the vax, while adding a superior immune response, introduces some level of risk from vaccine side effects, which as you know by now, I'm not yet comfortable with. It's a no brainer for many people (my Dad, my brother) -- and good for them -- but I don't yet see it for me personally and I don't mean any of this as a scare tactic.

You were kind enough to link me to the CDC website and I would be happy to return the favor with VAERS data. (I attached it). There are side effects reported (severity and frequency) that are of interest and I hope to have some time to continue to monitor real world data.

I still think others should be more interested in the possible side effect information, but this is not Twelve Angry Men and I am certainly not Henry Fonda.

I do not mean to scare people, and vaccination is the right decision for many many people, it just should not be mandated.

Best,

Greg
 

Attachments

  • VAERS-Summary-10012021.pdf
    1.2 MB · Views: 0

bluehende

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,507
Reaction score
3,967
Points
598
Hello @bluehende ,

It's a good question -- the best protection available is offered by some as a combination of natural immunity plus vax. We have all seen reports that this gives a strong immune response, however it is interesting to contemplate that the best of all might be vaccinated immunity followed by natural infection (could that be nature's booster shot?). Even if you dislike my comments in general, please reflect on this -- a combination of vaccinated immunity for short term protection followed by durable natural immunity due to a break-through infection. This would mean Don is a winner here, assuming mild disease continues, and you all know what a fan of natural immunity that I am.

And I know I repeat myself, but I believe natural immunity alone is sufficiently protective for many people and that adding the vax, while adding a superior immune response, introduces some level of risk from vaccine side effects, which as you know by now, I'm not yet comfortable with. It's a no brainer for many people (my Dad, my brother) -- and good for them -- but I don't yet see it for me personally and I don't mean any of this as a scare tactic.

You were kind enough to link me to the CDC website and I would be happy to return the favor with VAERS data. (I attached it). There are side effects reported (severity and frequency) that are of interest and I hope to have some time to continue to monitor real world data.

I still think others should be more interested in the possible side effect information, but this is not Twelve Angry Men and I am certainly not Henry Fonda.

I do not mean to scare people, and vaccination is the right decision for many many people, it just should not be mandated.

Best,

Greg
The VAERS data is raw data about events. It is by no means a list of verified side effects. It is a database of anything that can happen to a human at any time. The data is used to see if any adverse effect is statistically significant as opposed to normal. So far there has been a slight increase in risk of blood clots with women with the J&J and a slight increase in myocarditis is young males between 15 and 17 with the mrna vaccines. All of the other scare tactics are just that. Things that happen all the time and as far as I have seen are no more common in vaccinated people as in unvaccinated people. Data shows orders of magnitude more risk of these problems with an infection....even a mild one. Do your own research but any article that gives a number of events for vaccinated people and does not give the same percentage of events for unvaccinated people are quite simply trying to scare people needlessly.
 

GregT

TUG Member
TUG Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,128
Reaction score
1,886
Points
599
Location
Carlsbad, CA
Resorts Owned
Marriott: Maui Ocean Club Lahaina Villas (3BRx5), Ko Olina, Shadow Ridge II, Willow Ridge, Aruba Ocean Club, DC Points HGVC: Flamingo, Sea World, I-Drive, Starwood Bella (x4), SDO, TradeWinds, Worldmark
The VAERS data is raw data about events. It is by no means a list of verified side effects. It is a database of anything that can happen to a human at any time. The data is used to see if any adverse effect is statistically significant as opposed to normal. So far there has been a slight increase in risk of blood clots with women with the J&J and a slight increase in myocarditis is young males between 15 and 17 with the mrna vaccines. All of the other scare tactics are just that. Things that happen all the time and as far as I have seen are no more common in vaccinated people as in unvaccinated people. Data shows orders of magnitude more risk of these problems with an infection....even a mild one. Do your own research but any article that gives a number of events for vaccinated people and does not give the same percentage of events for unvaccinated people are quite simply trying to scare people needlessly.
Hello @bluehende Yes I agree. I totally agree that VAERS is raw data about events, but respectfully, you sent me to the CDC website which has some cartoon graphics and no data on side effects (other than from the clinical trials). I sent you back the VAERS raw data -- and I further agree that we have no data on verified side effects. Did I miss any better data from the weblink you sent me?

I ask again -- to your question (that I bolded), why is there no data on verified side effects? After 9 months? In my previous post (with the WaPo article), I suggested the answer was a health system that was disconnected -- and that it is difficult to gather the data -- therefore the USA (which I love love love) is not competent enough to gather the data. Anyone disagree with that? If so, where is the data?

So as noted in your response, I am doing my own research -- frankly a lot of it.

Best,

Greg

Edited to say that the CDC website has data on the clinical trials side effects.
 
Last edited:

GregT

TUG Member
TUG Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,128
Reaction score
1,886
Points
599
Location
Carlsbad, CA
Resorts Owned
Marriott: Maui Ocean Club Lahaina Villas (3BRx5), Ko Olina, Shadow Ridge II, Willow Ridge, Aruba Ocean Club, DC Points HGVC: Flamingo, Sea World, I-Drive, Starwood Bella (x4), SDO, TradeWinds, Worldmark
But since you brought up sinister, what is your position on censoring views that deviate from the narrative because the media (or the government) considers it misinformation. Let's use the lab leak theory as an example. What is your view on the media ridiculing/fact checking/censoring people who considered the lab leak theory possible in 2020 (and who have turned out to be right)?
Hey @Brett ,

I love a pot-stirrer as much as the next guy and you get my vote! You may have missed this so just including it again -- would love your thoughts and thanks!

Greg
 

davidvel

TUG Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
7,432
Reaction score
4,477
Points
648
Location
No. Cty. San Diego
Resorts Owned
Marriott Shadow Ridge (Villages)
Carlsbad Inn
Hello @bluehende Yes I agree. I totally agree that VAERS is raw data about events, but respectfully, you sent me to the CDC website which has some cartoon graphics and no data on side effects (other than from the clinical trials). I sent you back the VAERS raw data -- and I further agree that we have no data on verified side effects. Did I miss any better data from the weblink you sent me?

I ask again -- to your question (that I bolded), why is there no data on verified side effects? After 9 months? In my previous post (with the WaPo article), I suggested the answer was a health system that was disconnected -- and that it is difficult to gather the data -- therefore the USA (which I love love love) is not competent enough to gather the data. Anyone disagree with that? If so, where is the data?

So as noted in your response, I am doing my own research -- frankly a lot of it.

Best,

Greg

Edited to say that the CDC website has data on the clinical trials side effects.
There is both data on side effects, and analysis of that data.

First, you note the clinical trials. These were true double blind studies until they felt that the risks were so low vs. benefit, that they vaccinated the placebo subjects. This was an enormous trial. They did not find significant side effects. All the trial data is available to peruse if anyone is so inclined.

@bluehende also pointed out that there is a verification of side effects since mass vaccination has occurred. I know many think we are the great internet sleuths that know how parse VARS data, etc, who find what they think are side effects including death from the vaccine. Lots of anecdotal "they got the vaccine then died soon after, so vaccine caused death" experts. There are many more whose goal it is to find ways to bad mouth vaccinations who find lots of scary looking "side effects" that are not statistically significant.

Do you think the raw VARS data just sits out there in a vacuum, with nothing being done with it by the FDA, CDC, and other experts? That the experts are just ignoring it or leaving it for internet sleuths to decode?

In REALITY, there are actually hundreds and hundreds of people who are experts in the field that spend every working hour trying to determine if there is any true causation at play. They use scientific methods to assess whether there are things that are happening in the VARS data that indicate any kind of correlation or causation to the vaccine. They compare rates to normal rates in the population, among other things.

Where do you think they determined that there was an issue with blood clots and myocarditis? These experts saw the trends in the data. As EXPERTS they found the trends despite the miniscule, practically insignificant (from a statistical not human standpoint) difference with these issues in the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated population.
So they have "verified" a few side effects, and obviously analysis continues.

And yet, the loonie, tin foil hatters still think these experts are hiding side effects and manipulating the data. Nothing we can do about these people, they are simply disconnected from a rational world.
 

GregT

TUG Member
TUG Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,128
Reaction score
1,886
Points
599
Location
Carlsbad, CA
Resorts Owned
Marriott: Maui Ocean Club Lahaina Villas (3BRx5), Ko Olina, Shadow Ridge II, Willow Ridge, Aruba Ocean Club, DC Points HGVC: Flamingo, Sea World, I-Drive, Starwood Bella (x4), SDO, TradeWinds, Worldmark
There is both data on side effects, and analysis of that data.

First, you note the clinical trials. These were true double blind studies until they felt that the risks were so low vs. benefit, that they vaccinated the placebo subjects. This was an enormous trial. They did not find significant side effects. All the trial data is available to peruse if anyone is so inclined.

@bluehende also pointed out that there is a verification of side effects since mass vaccination has occurred. I know many think we are the great internet sleuths that know how parse VARS data, etc, who find what they think are side effects including death from the vaccine. Lots of anecdotal "they got the vaccine then died soon after, so vaccine caused death" experts. There are many more whose goal it is to find ways to bad mouth vaccinations who find lots of scary looking "side effects" that are not statistically significant.

Do you think the raw VARS data just sits out there in a vacuum, with nothing being done with it by the FDA, CDC, and other experts? That the experts are just ignoring it or leaving it for internet sleuths to decode?

In REALITY, there are actually hundreds and hundreds of people who are experts in the field that spend every working hour trying to determine if there is any true causation at play. They use scientific methods to assess whether there are things that are happening in the VARS data that indicate any kind of correlation or causation to the vaccine. They compare rates to normal rates in the population, among other things.

Where do you think they determined that there was an issue with blood clots and myocarditis? These experts saw the trends in the data. As EXPERTS they found the trends despite the miniscule, practically insignificant (from a statistical not human standpoint) difference with these issues in the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated population.
So they have "verified" a few side effects, and obviously analysis continues.

And yet, the loonie, tin foil hatters still think these experts are hiding side effects and manipulating the data. Nothing we can do about these people, they are simply disconnected from a rational world.
@davidvel So do you think we should mandatorily vaccinate these loonie, tin foil hatters for their own good?

I would like to respond to your other comments, but that would distract from this fundamental question.

It is a Yes/No.
 

davidvel

TUG Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
7,432
Reaction score
4,477
Points
648
Location
No. Cty. San Diego
Resorts Owned
Marriott Shadow Ridge (Villages)
Carlsbad Inn
@davidvel So do you think we should mandatorily vaccinate these loonie, tin foil hatters for their own good?

I would like to respond to your other comments, but that would distract from this fundamental question.

It is a Yes/No.
It's not a yes or no.

A bit of a loaded question, but no I don't think we should single any group of persons out and force a vaccination upon them. I don't believe that any person should physically have the vaccine forced into them. But limiting their public involvement if they refuse is a fair consequence.

We should have mandatory vaccinations for people in various activities, travel, medical workers, students, etc. for the time being, mandatory meaning that there are consequences, not that we inject them against their will. I think private employers should be able to mandate vaccinations for their employees in the same manner. Vaccinations for their good and everyone else's good.

As things move forward for the better, my views stated above will move further away from what I now believe.
 

GregT

TUG Member
TUG Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,128
Reaction score
1,886
Points
599
Location
Carlsbad, CA
Resorts Owned
Marriott: Maui Ocean Club Lahaina Villas (3BRx5), Ko Olina, Shadow Ridge II, Willow Ridge, Aruba Ocean Club, DC Points HGVC: Flamingo, Sea World, I-Drive, Starwood Bella (x4), SDO, TradeWinds, Worldmark
There is both data on side effects, and analysis of that data.

First, you note the clinical trials. These were true double blind studies until they felt that the risks were so low vs. benefit, that they vaccinated the placebo subjects. This was an enormous trial. They did not find significant side effects. All the trial data is available to peruse if anyone is so inclined.

@bluehende also pointed out that there is a verification of side effects since mass vaccination has occurred. I know many think we are the great internet sleuths that know how parse VARS data, etc, who find what they think are side effects including death from the vaccine. Lots of anecdotal "they got the vaccine then died soon after, so vaccine caused death" experts. There are many more whose goal it is to find ways to bad mouth vaccinations who find lots of scary looking "side effects" that are not statistically significant.

Do you think the raw VARS data just sits out there in a vacuum, with nothing being done with it by the FDA, CDC, and other experts? That the experts are just ignoring it or leaving it for internet sleuths to decode?

In REALITY, there are actually hundreds and hundreds of people who are experts in the field that spend every working hour trying to determine if there is any true causation at play. They use scientific methods to assess whether there are things that are happening in the VARS data that indicate any kind of correlation or causation to the vaccine. They compare rates to normal rates in the population, among other things.

Where do you think they determined that there was an issue with blood clots and myocarditis? These experts saw the trends in the data. As EXPERTS they found the trends despite the miniscule, practically insignificant (from a statistical not human standpoint) difference with these issues in the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated population.
So they have "verified" a few side effects, and obviously analysis continues.

And yet, the loonie, tin foil hatters still think these experts are hiding side effects and manipulating the data. Nothing we can do about these people, they are simply disconnected from a rational world.
Thank you @davidvel for your response to my question - I agree it is a tough one.

Returning to your other comments, yes in my view the VAERS data just sits there in a vacuum and is not analyzed. 778K reports is alot and I'm not aware of any other vaccine with 16K reported deaths that had no regulatory impact. A skeptic would say that in a different era, a vaccine would have been pulled from the market with 300 reported deaths. As I've said before, it bothers me that people get vaccinated and then die, and we may disagree on whether or not that death is properly investigated.

But I am repeating myself and I do not wish to institute scare tactics. This vaccine is important for many people, including my Dad and brother, but I still do not believe we understand it well enough to broadly mandate it.

Best,

Greg
 

bluehende

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,507
Reaction score
3,967
Points
598
Hello @bluehende Yes I agree. I totally agree that VAERS is raw data about events, but respectfully, you sent me to the CDC website which has some cartoon graphics and no data on side effects (other than from the clinical trials). I sent you back the VAERS raw data -- and I further agree that we have no data on verified side effects. Did I miss any better data from the weblink you sent me?

I ask again -- to your question (that I bolded), why is there no data on verified side effects? After 9 months? In my previous post (with the WaPo article), I suggested the answer was a health system that was disconnected -- and that it is difficult to gather the data -- therefore the USA (which I love love love) is not competent enough to gather the data. Anyone disagree with that? If so, where is the data?

So as noted in your response, I am doing my own research -- frankly a lot of it.

Best,

Greg

Edited to say that the CDC website has data on the clinical trials side effects.
This page gives actual numbers and click throughs to more data on side effects. I am not sure exactly what you would consider data and do not have time to read every click through. I whole heartedly disagree that the US cannot collect the data. Again we were behind in our vaccine rollout so other countries generated the data faster. Why would you criticize the cdc for using real data from somewhere else.

 

GregT

TUG Member
TUG Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,128
Reaction score
1,886
Points
599
Location
Carlsbad, CA
Resorts Owned
Marriott: Maui Ocean Club Lahaina Villas (3BRx5), Ko Olina, Shadow Ridge II, Willow Ridge, Aruba Ocean Club, DC Points HGVC: Flamingo, Sea World, I-Drive, Starwood Bella (x4), SDO, TradeWinds, Worldmark
This page gives actual numbers and click throughs to more data on side effects. I am not sure exactly what you would consider data and do not have time to read every click through. I whole heartedly disagree that the US cannot collect the data. Again we were behind in our vaccine rollout so other countries generated the data faster. Why would you criticize the cdc for using real data from somewhere else.

Hello Bluehende,

You are correct, this page does give the following data on side effects:

1) Estimated 400K to 1M cases of anaphylaxis (estimate based on 2 to 5 people per million vaccinated)
2) 47 confirmed reports of thrombo ctyopenia syndrome (TTS) with JNJ
3) 2 confirmed cases of TTS with Moderna
4) 219 cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome
5) 906 confirmed cases of myocarditis or pericarditis
6) 8,390 reports of death, but discloses that a report of death doesn't mean it's from the vaccine.

Setting aside anaphylaxis and death, this suggests 1,174 confirmed side effects from approx 400M doses given.

This is the data that is from the page you shared with me. From these data, it certainly looks safe and I can understand your frustration that it appears like I am ignoring data or am wrong when I say there is no analysis of the data.

At it's face, this appears therefore that the 778K reported adverse events in VAERS must be skewed in some manner towards anaphylaxis? And even I, who is the cynic, agree that anaphylaxis shouldn't discourage anyone from getting vaccinated.

So I am downloading the most current raw data file from the CDC's VAERS dataset. I have played with previous versions of this file before but have never focused on anaphylaxis. I have a new thesis to test and will be back sometime today.

Best,

Greg
 

davidvel

TUG Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
7,432
Reaction score
4,477
Points
648
Location
No. Cty. San Diego
Resorts Owned
Marriott Shadow Ridge (Villages)
Carlsbad Inn
Hello Bluehende,

You are correct, this page does give the following data on side effects:

1) Estimated 400K to 1M cases of anaphylaxis (estimate based on 2 to 5 people per million vaccinated)
2) 47 confirmed reports of thrombo ctyopenia syndrome (TTS) with JNJ
3) 2 confirmed cases of TTS with Moderna
4) 219 cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome
5) 906 confirmed cases of myocarditis or pericarditis
6) 8,390 reports of death, but discloses that a report of death doesn't mean it's from the vaccine.

Setting aside anaphylaxis and death, this suggests 1,174 confirmed side effects from approx 400M doses given.

This is the data that is from the page you shared with me. From these data, it certainly looks safe and I can understand your frustration that it appears like I am ignoring data or am wrong when I say there is no analysis of the data.

At it's face, this appears therefore that the 778K reported adverse events in VAERS must be skewed in some manner towards anaphylaxis? And even I, who is the cynic, agree that anaphylaxis shouldn't discourage anyone from getting vaccinated.

So I am downloading the most current raw data file from the CDC's VAERS dataset. I have played with previous versions of this file before but have never focused on anaphylaxis. I have a new thesis to test and will be back sometime today.

Best,

Greg
How do those numbers compare to the general distribution in the population?
 

bluehende

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,507
Reaction score
3,967
Points
598
Setting aside anaphylaxis and death, this suggests 1,174 confirmed side effects from approx 400M doses given.
confirmed is the wrong term

from the cdc

While very important in monitoring vaccine safety, VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness.
 

GregT

TUG Member
TUG Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,128
Reaction score
1,886
Points
599
Location
Carlsbad, CA
Resorts Owned
Marriott: Maui Ocean Club Lahaina Villas (3BRx5), Ko Olina, Shadow Ridge II, Willow Ridge, Aruba Ocean Club, DC Points HGVC: Flamingo, Sea World, I-Drive, Starwood Bella (x4), SDO, TradeWinds, Worldmark
confirmed is the wrong term

from the cdc

While very important in monitoring vaccine safety, VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness.
I am not sure what to say -- confirmed is the exact word from that CDC page.

So, in the VAERS database, of which there are 596,615 records, I was able to find the following inclusions:

5,729 records with anaphylaxis
1,953 records with shock
8,672 records with seizure

So, I'm really not sure what the other 580,000 records relate to. I can run other queries if there are other words I am missing.

For comparison, there are 2,238 records that include myocarditis and 2,112 records that include pericarditis. 8,168 records that include death or died. And to be fair, because I know people think I only see what I want to see, there are alot of reports of soreness (23,910) and aches (155K) that don't appear concerning.

Honestly, we should just agree to disagree. I don't think it's bad that someone is uncomfortable at this time with the side effect profile of these vaccines, and I don't think it's bad that someone is very comfortable with the side effect profile.

And I'm glad these vaccines are in place for my dad and my brother and I don't think the government should be mandating their use.

Best,

Greg
 

joestein

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
2,125
Points
574
Location
Marlboro, New Jersey
I think that Dr Fauci tries to be objective and is usually careful to not make conclusions that have not yet been proven (and new data become available daily). I think one problem is that people's perceptions are based on the news sources that often take his quotes out of context. This happens on both sides.


So, him saying that "we dont need masks" back in March/April 2020 is untrue? I

He is a gov't mouthpiece. He will say whatever they tell him to say. This wasn't the only issue with him. I prefer honesty.

Anybody with half a brain, knew it was best to wear a mask in presence of others. I used a homemade mask (only to go out for food shopping) until I could get my order from Alibaba.
 

bluehende

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,507
Reaction score
3,967
Points
598
I am not sure what to say -- confirmed is the exact word from that CDC page.

So, in the VAERS database, of which there are 596,615 records, I was able to find the following inclusions:

5,729 records with anaphylaxis
1,953 records with shock
8,672 records with seizure

So, I'm really not sure what the other 580,000 records relate to. I can run other queries if there are other words I am missing.

For comparison, there are 2,238 records that include myocarditis and 2,112 records that include pericarditis. 8,168 records that include death or died. And to be fair, because I know people think I only see what I want to see, there are alot of reports of soreness (23,910) and aches (155K) that don't appear concerning.

Honestly, we should just agree to disagree. I don't think it's bad that someone is uncomfortable at this time with the side effect profile of these vaccines, and I don't think it's bad that someone is very comfortable with the side effect profile.

And I'm glad these vaccines are in place for my dad and my brother and I don't think the government should be mandating their use.

Best,

Greg

confirmed adjective
side effect noun
is what you said

these are confirmed events.....but not confirmed side effects. Note my quote from the cdc web page.

I will say it again........these are not confirmed side effects.
 

davidvel

TUG Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
7,432
Reaction score
4,477
Points
648
Location
No. Cty. San Diego
Resorts Owned
Marriott Shadow Ridge (Villages)
Carlsbad Inn
So, him saying that "we dont need masks" back in March/April 2020 is untrue? I

He is a gov't mouthpiece. He will say whatever they tell him to say. This wasn't the only issue with him. I prefer honesty.

Anybody with half a brain, knew it was best to wear a mask in presence of others. I used a homemade mask (only to go out for food shopping) until I could get my order from Alibaba.
It's partially true: "Masks are really for infected people to prevent them from spreading infection to people who are not infected rather than protecting uninfected people from acquiring infection. The typical mask you buy in the drug store is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through material. It might, however, provide some slight benefit in keep out gross droplets if someone coughs or sneezes on you. "

This was when COVID was in its infancy in the U.S., when (Feb 2020) the official administration position was:
  • We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China, and we have it under control. It’s going to be just fine.

  • By April, you know, in theory, when it gets a little warmer, it miraculously goes away.

  • It’s going to disappear. One day, it’s like a miracle, it will disappear.

  • The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA.

  • We’re prepared, and we’re doing a great job with it. And it will go away. Just stay calm. It will go away.


    Also, at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, masks were not recommended by the CDC for the general public, as authorities were trying to prevent a mask shortage for health workers and the extent of asymptomatic spread was not believed to be high. At the time, those on the front line treating COVID infected patients could not get a steady supply of PPE, including masks. This recommendation changed in late March to early April of 2020 as the virus was better understood, including transmissibility, and masks became more widely available.​
 

davidvel

TUG Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
7,432
Reaction score
4,477
Points
648
Location
No. Cty. San Diego
Resorts Owned
Marriott Shadow Ridge (Villages)
Carlsbad Inn
confirmed adjective
side effect noun
is what you said

these are confirmed events.....but not confirmed side effects. Note my quote from the cdc web page.

I will say it again........these are not confirmed side effects.
Correct. The EXPERTS are actively comparing the rates of these varied events to the rates seen in the general population prior to vaccinating. A very few had higher incidences, and they have been followed up on. Even those had very mild effects, with almost all recovering.

Interestingly, some instances of these events (Bell’s palsy) are lower in the vaccination group, tending to show that the vaccine may be helpful for things other than preventing severe COVID infection.
 

joestein

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
2,125
Points
574
Location
Marlboro, New Jersey
It's partially true: "Masks are really for infected people to prevent them from spreading infection to people who are not infected rather than protecting uninfected people from acquiring infection. The typical mask you buy in the drug store is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through material. It might, however, provide some slight benefit in keep out gross droplets if someone coughs or sneezes on you. "

This was when COVID was in its infancy in the U.S., when (Feb 2020) the official administration position was:
  • We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China, and we have it under control. It’s going to be just fine.

  • By April, you know, in theory, when it gets a little warmer, it miraculously goes away.

  • It’s going to disappear. One day, it’s like a miracle, it will disappear.

  • The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA.

  • We’re prepared, and we’re doing a great job with it. And it will go away. Just stay calm. It will go away.


    Also, at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, masks were not recommended by the CDC for the general public, as authorities were trying to prevent a mask shortage for health workers and the extent of asymptomatic spread was not believed to be high. At the time, those on the front line treating COVID infected patients could not get a steady supply of PPE, including masks. This recommendation changed in late March to early April of 2020 as the virus was better understood, including transmissibility, and masks became more widely available.​

So, they lied because it suited their purpose. You just said it. Lie for this, lie for that. Who decides which lies are justified?
 

SueDonJ

Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
16,612
Reaction score
5,778
Points
1,249
Location
Massachusetts and Hilton Head Island
Resorts Owned
Marriott Barony Beach and SurfWatch
So, they lied because it suited their purpose. You just said it. Lie for this, lie for that. Who decides which lies are justified?

Good gravy. There's a difference between a political machine protecting itself by saying stupid things meant only to save their own political hides, and the guidance issued by an expert whose professional credibility with respect to pandemics had always been considered unimpeachable.

This question keeps getting asked but no one ever answers it. If the data and circumstances change as time passes, and the new data and new circumstances support changing the guidance as time passes, why on God's green Earth would ANYONE want a pandemic expert to NOT update his guidance as the data and circumstances teach him new things about a never-before-experienced pandemic?!
 

joestein

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
2,125
Points
574
Location
Marlboro, New Jersey
Good gravy. There's a difference between a political machine protecting itself by saying stupid things meant only to save their own political hides, and the guidance issued by an expert whose professional credibility with respect to pandemics had always been considered unimpeachable.

This question keeps getting asked but no one ever answers it. If the data and circumstances change as time passes, and the new data and new circumstances support changing the guidance as time passes, why on God's green Earth would ANYONE want a pandemic expert to NOT update his guidance as the data and circumstances teach him new things about a never-before-experienced pandemic?!
He lied. He even admitted he lied. He didn't change his opinion. He lied because he didn't want a run on masks. Still a lie.

Yes - I agree there is a difference. However, I want my medical opinion/advice to be truthful. Just give it to me straight doc!

Obviously they are lying about the hospital overflow as well. I think I proved it with the stats. They lied about where COVID might have come from. They lie about so much. Maybe the better question is when are they telling the truth?
 

"Roger"

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,414
Reaction score
3,211
Points
598
I believe that the death toll is exaggerated. I don't doubt that people died from COVID - but I bet you could probably shave off 100K - 200K. I think that anybody who died who tested positive for COVID was listed as killed by it....
FYI - The number of excess deaths for the US between March 7, 2020 and August 20, 2021 (not the entire period of the pandemic) was 788,460. The number of reported Covid deaths during that period was 614,640. That is a difference of about 174,000. So, if the shave off something in the range you cite, the number of reported Covid deaths is fairly accurate.

I should note, that most of what I read has said that coroners during the height of the pandemic did not bother to record all the deaths from Covid in that they were just too busy to check on what the cause of death was. In other words, most experts think that the number of Covid deaths has been under reported, not over reported.
 

bluehende

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,507
Reaction score
3,967
Points
598
Obviously they are lying about the hospital overflow as well. I think I proved it with the stats.
Far from it. You took cherry picked data from highly vaccinated areas. Please support your proof with any article that said Boston or the selected county in NJ had hospitals overflowing in the last week. It was well noted you had no data for the areas that actually reported overflowing hospitals.....wonder why? All you proved was why the highly vaccinated areas DID NOT have overflowing hospitals.
 

easyrider

TUG Review Crew: Elite
TUG Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2005
Messages
15,045
Reaction score
8,001
Points
948
Location
Palm Springs of Washinton
Resorts Owned
Worldmark * * Villa Del Palmar UVCI * * Vacation Internationale*
And yet, the loonie, tin foil hatters still think these experts are hiding side effects and manipulating the data. Nothing we can do about these people, they are simply disconnected from a rational world.

Come on man, your giving tin foil hatters a bad name adding them with the loonies. Also, the "experts" admit they don't have all the data, just enough data. This seems haphazardly bizarre to many. Kind of like using a travel agent and they give you everything but the last bit of itinerary because they don't know.

Bill
 

Brett

Guest
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
9,257
Reaction score
4,897
Points
598
Location
Coastal Virginia
Come on man, your giving tin foil hatters a bad name adding them with the loonies. Also, the "experts" admit they don't have all the data, just enough data. This seems haphazardly bizarre to many. Kind of like using a travel agent and they give you everything but the last bit of itinerary because they don't know.

Bill


I guess it's like those people taking ivermectin for covid. Loonies, tin foil hatters - still disconnected from the rational world
 
Top