1539 replies to this topic

[Hip]

The breakout by age in the post does not tell the full story, however. Going back to the source, we find that the 37 deaths among vaccinated <50s were among 62403 cases → 0.06% cmr. The 99 deaths among unvaccinated <50s were among 212989 cases → 0.05% cmr. So among the <50s, the vaccine did not protect from death, and may have enhanced death a little.

In the vaccinated >50s, the 1054 deaths were among 51420 cases → 2.0% cmr. The unvaccinated 437 deaths were among 6724 cases → 6.5% cmr. So, among the >50s, the vaccine did actually protect from death (phew!).

 

I believe your figures and analysis are mathematically correct, but there may be a good explanation for why there appears to be percentage-wise more COVID deaths in the under 50s vaccinated group: this article looks at similar Public Heath England data, and comments that:

 

 

A particular statistic that caused consternation in some parts was the fact that the mortality rate in the vaccinated group (68 deaths) was higher than in the unvaccinated (38 deaths) in the over 50s. Although this sounds concerning, it is likely to be an artefact: those at risk of dying are the ones who have been vaccinated.

 

In other words, most of the under 50s would rightly not be so concerned with the possibility of death from COVID, since death is a relatively low risk in at age group. So many under 50s may not bother to get a vaccine. However, those under 50s with underlying health issues which make them more vulnerable to COVID death will tend to be the ones who, sensibly, elect to get vaccinated. And this may explain why there are percentage-wise more COVID deaths in the vaccinated under 50s, because the vaccinated will tend to be the people with underlying health issues.

Edited by Hip, 15 September 2021 - 04:28 AM.

[Dorian Grey]

Babies could be given Pfizer's Covid vaccine in the US this winter: Company plans to seek approval for jabbing six-month-olds in November

 

https://www.dailymai...jab-winter.html

 

"Pfizer's Covid vaccine could be rolled out to babies as young as six months in the US this winter, under plans being drawn up by the pharmaceutical giant".

 

Why did Harry Chapin's old song Dance Band on the Titanic just pop into my head?  

 

[geo12the]

Babies could be given Pfizer's Covid vaccine in the US this winter: Company plans to seek approval for jabbing six-month-olds in November

 

 

"Pfizer's Covid vaccine could be rolled out to babies as young as six months in the US this winter, under plans being drawn up by the pharmaceutical giant".

 

Why did Harry Chapin's old song Dance Band on the Titanic just pop into my head?  

 

 

Newsflash: Babies already get lots of vaccines!  I don't have one but if I did I would do all I could to get it one. 

 

Vaccine 2 mos 4 mos Diphtheria, tetanus, & acellular pertussis (DTaP: <7 yrs) 1^st dose 2^nd dose Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) 1^st dose 2^nd dose Pneumococcal conjugate (PCV13) 1^st dose 2^nd dose Inactivated poliovirus (IPV: <18 yrs) 1^st dose 2^nd dose

Edited by geo12the, 15 September 2021 - 03:46 PM.

[Dorian Grey]

How many of the current pediatric jabs were whipped up in less than a year, using an entirely new platform; sent VAERS vaccine fatality reports into the stratosphere, and became notorious for inducing myocarditis in younger populations.  

 

How would a 6 month old communicate chest pain & shortness of breath?  

[DanCG]

I believe your figures and analysis are mathematically correct, but there may be a good explanation for why there appears to be percentage-wise more COVID deaths in the under 50s vaccinated group: this article looks at similar Public Heath England data, and comments that:

 

 

 

In other words, most of the under 50s would rightly not be so concerned with the possibility of death from COVID, since death is a relatively low risk in at age group. So many under 50s may not bother to get a vaccine. However, those under 50s with underlying health issues which make them more vulnerable to COVID death will tend to be the ones who, sensibly, elect to get vaccinated. And this may explain why there are percentage-wise more COVID deaths in the vaccinated under 50s, because the vaccinated will tend to be the people with underlying health issues.

This seems plausible. It could be that the vaccinated <50s in this data set are enriched for people who would have had a high death rate had they not been vaccinated. (Can we say that they are functionally old?). These people self-identify as being at risk and seek the vaccine.

 

It is still hard to fathom why this would effect the death rate not the other measured outcomes. The unvaccinated <50s are comparatively more likely to visit the ER, and more likely to stay overnight.

 

 

Crunching the numbers some more, if you compare the number of deaths to the number who stayed in the hospital, the difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated <50s becomes wider. The vaccinated are much more likely to die. Either there is a big difference in what happens in the hospital, or more vaccinated people are dying without going to the hospital.

 

So, in addition to the proposal that vaccinated many include more people at intrinsically higher risk than the unvaccinated, consider this: Maybe the vaccinated people do not expect serious illness, so they wait longer to seek treatment. Then when they do seek treatment, the admitting clinicians do not expect them to progress, so they do not require them to stay or they are not treated with urgency to the same extent that unvaccinated people are. Because, everyone knows that unvaccinated people are doomed and vaccinated people are protected.

 

In any case, I agree that behavioral and/or perhaps genetic factors need to be considered, as a purely immunological explanation, like ADE, does not fit the data.

[geo12the]

How many of the current pediatric jabs were whipped up in less than a year, using an entirely new platform; sent VAERS vaccine fatality reports into the stratosphere, and became notorious for inducing myocarditis in younger populations.  

 

How would a 6 month old communicate chest pain & shortness of breath?  

 

The latest study suggests  that rate of myocarditis is much higher in unvaccinated who get COVID. 

 

"The strongest tie between the vaccine and an adverse event was myocarditis, with an excess risk of 1 to 5 events per 100,000 people

 

In contrast, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection among unvaccinated patients was associated with a significantly elevated risk of myocarditis 11.0 events per 100,000 persons"

[DanCG]

 

 

In other words, most of the under 50s would rightly not be so concerned with the possibility of death from COVID, since death is a relatively low risk in at age group. So many under 50s may not bother to get a vaccine. However, those under 50s with underlying health issues which make them more vulnerable to COVID death will tend to be the ones who, sensibly, elect to get vaccinated. And this may explain why there are percentage-wise more COVID deaths in the vaccinated under 50s, because the vaccinated will tend to be the people with underlying health issues.

It should be emphasized that it follows from this line of reasoning that there is a certain type of patient that vaccines will fail to protect. There are risk factors that cause a person to continue at high risk even if they are vaccinated. These have to be that same risk factors that are widely known to the general public and would cause an individual to conclude, “I really need to get vaccinated”. Otherwise, the above hypothesis would not work.

 

The results for the unvaccinated group could likewise be skewed by people who were really at risk, but failed to recognize those risk factors in themselves. Such as people in denial about their overweight, or unaware of their pre-diabetes or vitamin D insufficiency.

 

For individuals with known risk, lifestyle changes to mitigate the risk are more important than vaccination.

Edited by DanCG, 15 September 2021 - 07:14 PM.

[DanCG]

The latest study suggests  that rate of myocarditis is much higher in unvaccinated who get COVID. 

 

"The strongest tie between the vaccine and an adverse event was myocarditis, with an excess risk of 1 to 5 events per 100,000 people

 

In contrast, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection among unvaccinated patients was associated with a significantly elevated risk of myocarditis 11.0 events per 100,000 persons"

How many babies were in the study?

 

I’ll save you some time: “Eligibility criteria included an age of 16 years or older “

[Dorian Grey]

The latest study suggests  that rate of myocarditis is much higher in unvaccinated who get COVID. 

 

"The strongest tie between the vaccine and an adverse event was myocarditis, with an excess risk of 1 to 5 events per 100,000 people

 

In contrast, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection among unvaccinated patients was associated with a significantly elevated risk of myocarditis 11.0 events per 100,000 persons"

 

Didn't see in the study you quote the number of toddlers in the cohort, but let's posit the vaccines will in fact reduce myocarditis & COVID death in preschoolers. 

 

If the VAERS vaccine related fatalities for adults is not entirely inaccurate, we're still going to have "some" perfectly healthy bouncing baby boys & girls ambulanced off & winding up in the fridge at the hospital morgue shortly after getting their jabs.  

 

We can justify these "acceptable casualties" under the "greater good" principle, as we're still saving lives in the aggregate, but it could make for some pretty bad press.  Will the shell shocked dads & wailing mothers be silenced, censored and hidden from view?  Will the little ones be awarded a medal of honor at their funerals for service to their country?  

 

Will mandates for this age group fly with the mantra some must die for the greater good?  Will this really stop transmission of the virus and end the pandemic?  

[Hip]

We can justify these "acceptable casualties" under the "greater good" principle, as we're still saving lives in the aggregate, but it could make for some pretty bad press.  Will the shell shocked dads & wailing mothers be silenced, censored and hidden from view?  Will the little ones be awarded a medal of honor at their funerals for service to their country?  

 

What about the reverse argument, regarding the 50,000 COVID deaths in the US alone that resulted from the organized anti-vax movements, who have used sophisticated media communications techniques to scare millions away from getting the vaccines.

 

For the last few months, nearly all the people who have died of COVID are unvaccinated people. In the US, over the last 3 or 4 months when COVID vaccines were available for those who want them, on average there have been around 500 COVID deaths per day, and the vast majority of those are in unvaccinated people.

 

If we add those daily deaths up, that's around 50,000 deaths that have occurred over the last 3 or 4 months, simply because the people have been convinced by the anti-vaxers not to get vaccinated.

 

 

Can we justify these 50,000 deaths as "acceptable casualties" in order to maintain the principle of freedom of speech?

 

If we had closed down the anti-vax movements, curtailing their freedom of speech, 50,000 people would be alive today. Is the death of 50,000 people the price we are happy to pay for the right of charlatan anti-vaxers to have their freedom of expression? 

 

Shall we posthumously award a medal to all these 50,000 dead people, stating that the sacrifice of their lives was for the noble cause of protecting the 1st amendment, and freedom of speech?

 

 

In my view, anyone who promotes the anti-vax message, including those on this forum, are morally responsible in part for the death of 50,000 people in the US alone.

Edited by Hip, 15 September 2021 - 09:50 PM.

[Dorian Grey]

What about the reverse argument, regarding the 50,000 COVID deaths in the US alone that resulted from the organized anti-vax movements, who have used sophisticated media communications techniques to scare millions away from getting the vaccines.

 

For the last few months, nearly all the people who have died of COVID are unvaccinated people. In the US, over the last 3 or 4 months when COVID vaccines were available for those who want them, on average there have been around 500 COVID deaths per day, and the vast majority of those are in unvaccinated people.

 

If we add those daily deaths up, that's around 50,000 deaths that have occurred over the last 3 or 4 months, simply because the people have been convinced by the anti-vaxers not to get vaccinated.

 

 

Can we justify these 50,000 deaths as "acceptable casualties" in order to maintain the principle of freedom of speech?

 

If we had closed down the anti-vax movements, curtailing their freedom of speech, 50,000 people would be alive today. Is the death of 50,000 people the price we are happy to pay for the right of charlatan anti-vaxers to have their freedom of expression? 

 

Shall we posthumously award a medal to all these 50,000 dead people, stating that the sacrifice of their lives was for the noble cause of protecting the 1st amendment, and freedom of speech?

 

 

In my view, anyone who promotes the anti-vax message, including those on this forum, are morally responsible in part for the death of 50,000 people in the US alone.

 

The argument free speech must be sacrificed so that the dimmest chowder-heads of society are protected from themselves is in itself morally irresponsible.  

 

“I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” has been the hallmark of free & civilized societies around the world for centuries.  

 

"Those who give up freedom for security deserve neither"

 

Regarding forced medical interventions...  You may be able herd great numbers to this, but there will always be a segment that that will resist, & the medical ethics of coercion are historically distasteful to say the least.  

 

If the vaccinated did not continue to catch, spread, and wind up in hospital with symptomatic disease, your argument would be much stronger; but we're never going to vaccinate our way out of this pandemic with the jabs we're using now.  

 

Let Darwin's law take care of the anti-vaxxers for you.  Once you are free of them for good, you can start on your Brave New World.  

[Hip]

Let Darwin's law take care of the anti-vaxxers for you.

 
Darwinian selection of the more intelligent is exactly what is happening in this pandemic, with those who are foolish enough to be taken in by all the conspiracy theories and quackery the anti-vaxers publish paying the ultimate price for their mistakes. 
 
However, that does not exonerate the anti-vaxers from moral culpability. Just because some people in society are vulnerable to being tricked into making mistakes because of their limited intelligence, that does not give you the right to exploit their ignorance and kill them. Tricking a low intelligence person into doing something silly that is likely to kill them is still murder. So that still makes those promoting the anti-vaxer message murderers in my book.
 
Yes, there will always be people who refuse vaccination, and there is not much you can do about that, but the amount of people shunning vaccination has rocketed out of all proportions, due to the anti-vaxer groups pushing their message on social media, making anti-vax movies, organizing anti-vax demonstrations in the streets, and so forth.

 

If someone does not want to get vaccinated, that is there decision. There are Darwinian consequences, but it is their decision. However, if someone now tricks other people of limited intelligence not to get vaccinated, and that person who was tricked later dies of COVID, that is tantamount to murder.

 

So there is a difference between refusing the vaccine yourself, which is a personal decision, and publishing anti-vaccine propaganda designed to trick low IQ people into refusing the vaccine. It's the latter which I find morally culpable, not the former. 

 

 

 

 

“I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” has been the hallmark of free & civilized societies around the world for centuries.

 

Free speech must still remain within the law. You cannot start giving speeches where you incite violence or urge people to kill other people, or to kill themselves. You would be arrested for incitement. There have been religious cults where the charismatic leader has urged his gullible followers to kill themselves. That is illegal, and that charismatic leader would not be allowed free speech to express such a suicidal message. He would be arrested.

 

The anti-vaxer groups are advocating killing people by their messaging, just like a charismatic leader of a religious cult. So why is that allowed, when murder is illegal?

Edited by Hip, 16 September 2021 - 12:55 AM.

[DanCG]

What about the reverse argument, regarding the 50,000 COVID deaths in the US alone that resulted from the organized anti-vax movements, 

Where is the evidence for this 50,000 number? Did I miss a link?

 

Let’s look at this in light of the data we have been discussing, starting at post 1123. Less than 0.05% of the unvaccinated <50 cohort died. This was the lowest case fatality rate of any studied group. That fact alone makes foregoing vaccination a rational decision for an <50 individual. Now maybe these people chose not to get vaccinated for other, less rational, reasons. But even so, the outcome does not show that any anti-vax propaganda is killing people.

 

We worked through a rational basis for why the higher mortality in the <50 vaccinated group may not really mean the vaccinated group as a whole was necessarily at higher risk of dying (posts 1141, 1145, 1147). But, the fact remains that the empirical evidence in this report does not convincingly show that the vaccine actually helps people in this age group survive either. Where is the evidence for thousands of people dying because they are not vaccinated? In fact, if my reasoning in posts 1145 and 1147 is correct, people are dying because of too much faith in vaccines.

[Hip]

Let’s look at this in light of the data we have been discussing, starting at post 1123. Less than 0.05% of the unvaccinated <50 cohort died. This was the lowest case fatality rate of any studied group. That fact alone makes foregoing vaccination a rational decision for an <50 individual. 

 

You cannot base a rational decision on the figures we were discussing, because there are too many uncontrolled variables, such as the one I mentioned — that in the under 50s group, it is likely that those who already have major health problems will tend to get the vaccination. If you want accurate data, you really need a randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial.

 

When we look at the clinical trials of the vaccines, they showed the vaccines reduces the rate of hospitalization by 90% or more, depending on the vaccine.

[Hebbeh]

Older age, chronic co-morbidities associated with more severe COVID disease in children -- ScienceDaily

 

In an effort to aid mitigation strategies for children who are at high risk of developing severe COVID disease, a group of physicians at Monroe Carell Jr. Children's Hospital at Vanderbilt studied data from 45 children's hospitals around the country -- 20,000 patients were included.

"This is one of the largest multicenter studies of children with COVID-19 in the United States," said James Antoon, MD, PhD, FAAP, assistant professor of Pediatrics at Children's Hospital and lead author of the study.

 

The retrospective cohort study noted that approximately 1 out of every 4 children admitted to the hospital with COVID developed severe disease and required ICU care during April and September, 2020.

 

 

 

 

 

[Dorian Grey]

https://openvaers.com/

 

https://openvaers.co...-data/mortality

 

https://openvaers.co...ospitalizations

 

There are pediatric risks to not being vaccinated, but also risks from the vaccines.  

 

If there are pediatric deaths and/or serious injuries related to mandated vaccines, what do we do with the shell shocked fathers & wailing mothers.  Should they be heard?  Silenced?  Censored?  Ridiculed for even suggesting a link with vaccination?  

 

Be careful what you wish for...  It just might come true!  Dead babies from COVID a tragedy, but dead babies from vaccines could be very bad for the "safe & effective" public image.  This could set the whole booster program for adults right on its tail.  I believe this may be why England has decided to punt on their pediatric vaccination program.  The risk/reward isn't about the kids...  It's about the whole vaccine program.  

 

Attached Files

•  VAERS.png   42.93KB   0 downloads

Edited by Dorian Grey, 16 September 2021 - 04:57 AM.

[lancebr]

This could set the whole booster program for adults right on its tail.  I believe this may be why England has decided to punt on their pediatric vaccination program.  The risk/reward isn't about the kids...  It's about the whole vaccine program.  

 

In reference to the booster program....I have noticed recently that there has been more and more discussions about what

the effects might be of continually taking booster shots every 6 months or so and constantly revving up your immune system.

 

One comment made about this type of situation sounded kind of alarming:

 

"There's a risk of Zone Tolerance, in which the constantly revved-up IgG quenches the production of longer-term T-cells and

Memory B-cells (which both can provide long term protection), making the patient lacking of a fully-functioning immune system without

constant booster shots at regular intervals."
 

Edited by lancebr, 16 September 2021 - 07:29 AM.

[DanCG]

You cannot base a rational decision on the figures we were discussing, because there are too many uncontrolled variables, such as the one I mentioned — that in the under 50s group, it is likely that those who already have major health problems will tend to get the vaccination. If you want accurate data, you really need a randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial.

 

When we look at the clinical trials of the vaccines, they showed the vaccines reduces the rate of hospitalization by 90% or more, depending on the vaccine.

We agreed that the <50 sets may differ in ways other than just +/- vaccine. My point is that this real-world data does not show that large numbers of people have been swayed by misinformation and died as a result.

[Hip]

We agreed that the <50 sets may differ in ways other than just +/- vaccine. My point is that this real-world data does not show that large numbers of people have been swayed by misinformation and died as a result.

 

It's hard to get solid data that quantifies to effects of the anti-vax movement, in terms of the numbers of people refusing COVID vaccination because of the movement. This is because COVID vaccination is a one-off, and we do not have previous data on COVID vaccine uptake. 

 

However, we know from earlier anti-vax activism that a few anti-vax news stories, even if quackery or fraudulent, can be highly influential on the public's behavior. Case in point is the disgraced British doctor, Dr Andrew Wakefield, who in 1998 promoted the idea that the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine was the cause of autism by means of a fraudulent study.

 

All the epidemiological studies indicate that the MMR vaccine did not cause autism, and in fact tended to reduce the incidence of autism, but this single voice of Dr Wakefield was enough to cause MMR vaccine vaccine uptake to drop from the normal 95%, down to 80%, a 15% drop in the percentage of children getting the MMR. 

 

Wakefield later got involved with the "Conspira-Sea" cruises, a gathering of conspiracy theory aficionados on a cruise ship on the ocean. On this ship, he presented his anti-MMR propaganda alongside people presenting talks on crop circles, UFOs, chemtrails, and other such nonsense. Once a scientist starts mingling among crop circle fanatics, he's clearly demonstrating a deranged mental outlook.

 

 

 

 

The Wakefield case shows that any anti-vax stories can have substantial effects on human behavior. Nowadays, with the advent of the internet, smartphones and social media, anti-vax material spreads much faster than it did in 1998. The sophistication of the anti-vax groups has also greatly increased: they have become very adept at using the internet and social media for spreading their message. 

 

And the anti-vax movement has grown, and now includes powerful and rich figures like Mercola, Robert F. Kennedy, and dozens of others, who each have their own businesses or organizations, and large followings, so the anti-vax movement has become very influential. Of course Trump was the anti-vaxer in chief when he was in office. Indeed, Trump even met up with Dr Andrew Wakefield soon after he became president. 

 

Plus we have movies that are made which embody the anti-vax propaganda. In the UK and the US, these movies tend to get banned quickly, but they still have effect.

 

In France for example, the anti-vax propaganda film Hold-Up by Pierre Barnérias was influential, and was available to watch online. The film promotes the toxic idea that SARS-CoV-2 was deliberately created as a ploy to enslave humanity. Of course only the dumb would believe this, but such people numerous. 

 

Unfortunately the French YouTube did not act quick enough to remove this Hold-Up movie, and so it was watched by millions. It apparently is very popular among French QAnon conspiracy theorists, and still shared between people today.

Edited by Hip, 16 September 2021 - 02:14 PM.

[DanCG]

 

It's hard to get solid data that quantifies to effects of the anti-vax movement, 

No problem. Just guess its 50,000 excess deaths and go with that.

[Hip]

No problem. Just guess its 50,000 excess deaths and go with that.

 

So what is your explanation for why those 50,000 dead people did not vaccinate?

 

Those 50,000 people who died were not vaccinated, in spite of the fact that everyone is aware there is a killer virus in our midst. It's a no-brainer to get vaccinated when there is such a killer about, yet these people did not, and they died as a consequence of that fateful decision. 

 

 

I can see three possible explanations for why these people decided not to vaccinate:

 

(1) They might have low IQ, and thus do not have the ability to understand the basic scientific concepts of vaccine protection. Or they might just be young and foolish.

 

(2) They have sufficient IQ enough to understand the concept of vaccine protection, but are gullible personalities, and thus fell for the anti-vax propaganda, and so refused vaccination. Or they might be suffering from mental health conditions which affect their rational judgement. An astounding 4% of the population have schizotypy, a very mild type of schizophrenia which causes you to become paranoid and suspicious of authority, as well as highly susceptible to believing in conspiracy theories. 

 

(3) They are just lazy or procrastinating people, who intended to get the vaccine, but never got around to it. Then sadly they were hit my COVID, and it was game over for them.

[DanCG]

So what is your explanation for why those 50,000 dead people did not vaccinate?

 

 

Why would I try to explain something I don't even know exists? If you posted a reference and I missed it, sorry. Please point me to it.  As far a I know the 50,000 figure is something you guessed. 

[geo12the]

So what is your explanation for why those 50,000 dead people did not vaccinate?

 

Those 50,000 people who died were not vaccinated, in spite of the fact that everyone is aware there is a killer virus in our midst. It's a no-brainer to get vaccinated when there is such a killer about, yet these people did not, and they died as a consequence of that fateful decision. 

 

 

I can see three possible explanations for why these people decided not to vaccinate:

 

(1) They might have low IQ, and thus do not have the ability to understand the basic scientific concepts of vaccine protection. Or they might just be young and foolish.

 

(2) They have sufficient IQ enough to understand the concept of vaccine protection, but are gullible personalities, and thus fell for the anti-vax propaganda, and so refused vaccination. Or they might be suffering from mental health conditions which affect their rational judgement. An astounding 4% of the population have schizotypy, a very mild type of schizophrenia which causes you to become paranoid and suspicious of authority, as well as highly susceptible to believing in conspiracy theories. 

 

(3) They are just lazy or procrastinating people, who intended to get the vaccine, but never got around to it. Then sadly they were hit my COVID, and it was game over for them.

 

A fourth and fifth possible explanation:

 

(4) The pandemic has become politicized to such an extent that some on the right see being anti vax and anti mask as part of their political team identity. Getting vaxed would betray their political team and would be a win for the other side.

(5) Distrust of the medical establishment, which is common on both the left and right fringes.  I live in a city in CA with a lower vaccination rate than surrounding cities. The reason is not due to rabid right-wingnuts, although that is contributing,  but primarily young African Americans who are distrustful of the medical establishment. 

 

None of these possibilities are mutually exclusive. 

Edited by geo12the, 16 September 2021 - 04:07 PM.

[Hip]

Why would I try to explain something I don't even know exists? If you posted a reference and I missed it, sorry. Please point me to it.  As far a I know the 50,000 figure is something you guessed. 

 

It is not a guessed figure. As I explained a few posts back, in the last 3 or 4 months in the US alone, there have been 500 COVID deaths per day on average, and the vast majority of those are in the unvaccinated. Check the Daily New Deaths graph in the USA Worldometer; you will see that there have been around 500 deaths per day on average.

 

Over 3 or 4 months, that equates to about 50,000 deaths in unvaccinated people. Most of those people would almost certainly be alive today if they had decided to get vaccinated. 

 

Initially vaccines were in short supply, but in the last 3 or 4 months they have become available to all people more vulnerable to COVID in the developed world. So these people were not unvaccinated because of a shortage of vaccines, but because they chose not to get vaccinated, or neglected to get vaccinated. 

 

Whatever the reason for their decision not to vaccinate, it led to their death. If that decision was influenced by the organized anti-vax groups, then those groups effectively killed those people.

Edited by Hip, 16 September 2021 - 04:20 PM.

[geo12the]

The sad thing to me is that humans in 2020 were faced with this terrible disease. Scientists found a way to prevent it. Prevent human suffering. But a part of the population, for one reason or another-political identity, distrust of the medical establishment, whatever- are against it. And now are actively cheerleading for the vaccines to fail. You can see it here with people digging through COVID stats and misrepresenting them in the worst light, railing against experts but believing fringe MDs from Idaho. Because for some it's more important that they are right and the other side is wrong.  More important to BE right than to do the right thing. It's a sad commentary on the state of the human race now. We are all in this together folks! AND free speech extends to those who question the insanity of the anti-vax anti-science side. 

[Hip]

I'd like to see the chief anti-vaxers prosecuted for murder at some point. They need to be treated in the same way we treated Nazi war criminals who killed all those people in concentration camps.

 

Anti-Vaxer Tucker Carlson for example is pure scum. He's probably vaccinated himself (nearly all Fox News staff are), yet he maintains his aggressive anti-vax stance as he knows it's a popular theme which boosts his ratings. Someone willing to sacrifice the lives of of 50,000 Americans just to maintain his TV audience ratings is deeply evil, just as bad as any Nazi. 

Edited by Hip, 17 September 2021 - 01:42 AM.

[DanCG]

And right on time, another right-wing propaganda site comes out with more anti-vax misinformation.

 

[geo12the]

And right on time, another right-wing propaganda site comes out with more anti-vax misinformation.

 

Not exactly anti-vax, boosters not needed now because the vaccines are working well enough. BUT the point is it's not a frigin contest. I am not keeping score, I just want truth to win. Does everyone else?

Edited by geo12the, 19 September 2021 - 03:24 AM.

[Heisok]

DanCG, did you read the article that you linked to? I will just post the beginning.

 

FDA advisory group rejects Covid boosters for most, limits to high-risk groups

 

"A Food and Drug Administration advisory panel overwhelmingly voted Friday against giving Pfizer-BioNTech's Covid-19 booster shots to most people on Friday, agreeing only to distribute them to people ages 65 and up as well as those at high risk of severe illness.

The unanimous recommendation of boosters for a limited group of Americans was the second vote called by the Vaccine and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, or VRBPAC, during its meeting Friday.

 

"The committee of outside experts was first asked whether a third shot of Pfizer's vaccine would be safe and effective for everyone ages 16 and older. Members overwhelmingly voted against that recommendation, citing concerns about the level of evidence showing the boosters are safe for younger people. 

 

“We’re being asked to approve this as a three-dose vaccine for people 16 years of age and older, without any clear evidence if the third dose for a younger person when compared to an elderly person is of value,” said committee member Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia."

 

 

[Advocatus Diaboli]

"DanCG, did you read the article that you linked to? I will just post the beginning."

 

Looks like DanCG needed to put a "/s" in his post.