2090 replies to this topic

[geo12the]

Vaccines still saving lives:

 

https://www.nytimes....vaccinated.html

 

 

[Mind]

Vaccines still saving lives:

 

https://www.nytimes....vaccinated.html

 

Sadly, behind a paywall.

 

EU warns against repeated booster shots, saying it reduces immunity.

 

Maybe this is why hospitals are increasingly filling up with injected people (like in Houston)

 

There are increasing numbers of healthy injected people dying as well, like this young healthy model. It makes me wonder sometimes if mortality data is being accurately tabulated. The CDC is having trouble maintaining an accurate database of who is injected and doesn't track all breakthrough cases, so there are known issues.

Edited by Mind, 12 January 2022 - 06:21 PM.

[geo12the]

Sadly, behind a paywall.

 

 

 

I've attached the figures. Bottom line is vaccinated still faring better. I know several folks who are vaxxed and tested positive since December. All have been mild and/or short lived. Heard tonight from a former coworker of my spouse, vaxxed and boosted,  said he felt quite sick for two days and then completely fine.

Attached Files

•  cases.jpg   109.1KB   0 downloads
•  hospitalizations.jpg   110.07KB   0 downloads
•  deaths.jpg   102.48KB   0 downloads

[Mind]

I've attached the figures. Bottom line is vaccinated still faring better. I know several folks who are vaxxed and tested positive since December. All have been mild and/or short lived. Heard tonight from a former coworker of my spouse, vaxxed and boosted,  said he felt quite sick for two days and then completely fine.

 

Thanks for posting the figures.

 

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I know vastly more injected people that have caught COVID. In my circle of acquaintances, the severity of illness seems to be about the same, although recently, one cousin (injected, boosted, constantly wears a mask, self-isolates, etc...) landed in the hospital with lung/breathing issues because of COVID...will probably survive.

 

I am still skeptical of the CDC's record-keeping. Australia is yet another country where more injected people are landing in the hospital than non-injected people. In December, in the UK vastly more injected people died of COVID than non-injected people. Maybe more of the non-injected people in the UK have stronger/better natural immunity, leading to the difference in mortality, just spit-balling a possible reason.

[Mind]

Here is a rather eye-opening statement from the head of Pfizer, saying the standard two-dose injection of the mRNA shot "provides little if any protection" (with a booster it is better, he claims).

 

This is way out of line with earlier statements on the COVID shots, proclaiming near 100% effectiveness. We can see from data coming out of multiple countries that the COVID injections have done almost nothing to stop the pandemic, now the Pfizer CEO adds credibility to this assessment. Recall that a whistle-blower complained about shoddy practices and serious data integrity issues during the Pfizer trials...maybe there is something to that. Maybe she should not have been fired.

[DanCG]

Prevalence, characteristics, and predictors of Long COVID among diagnosed cases of COVID-19

 

We recruited adult (≥18 years) patients who were diagnosed as Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RTPCR) confirmed SARS-COV-2 infection and were either hospitalized or tested on outpatient basis….Characteristics of Long COVID were elicited, and multivariable logistic regression was done to find the predictors of Long COVID.

Statistically significant predictors of Long COVID were -

• Pre-existing medical conditions (Adjusted Odds ratio (aOR)=2.00, 95% CI: 1.16,3.44),

• having a more significant number of symptoms during acute phase of COVID-19 disease (aOR=11.24, 95% CI: 4.00,31.51),

• two doses of COVID-19 vaccination (aOR=2.32, 95% CI: 1.17,4.58),

• the severity of illness (aOR=5.71, 95% CI: 3.00,10.89) and

• being admitted to hospital (Odds ratio (OR)=3.89, 95% CI: 2.49,6.08).

 

That was from the abstract. In the Discussion, they mention all of the predictors except vaccination. It’s like they don’t want to talk about it. What would they say anyway. I have not seen anything about the vaccines that would predict or explain that outcome.

 

[Advocatus Diaboli]

From post #186:

 

"In the Discussion, they mention all of the predictors except vaccination. It’s like they don’t want to talk about it."

 

From the discussion section of the study cited in post #186:

 

"An observational paradox in our study was that the participants who took two doses of COVID-19 vaccination had higher odds of developing Long COVID. It could be due to better survival in vaccinated individuals who may continue to exhibit symptoms of COVID-19 disease. But we could not find any literature on this association, and based on this study, we cannot imply causation. Age and sex, which was commonly found to be associated with Long COVID was not a significant predictor in our study. Cycle threshold (Ct) values of two genes were also not a significant predictor of Long COVID.".  (my emphasis)

[Hip]

A study by King’s College London found that if you catch COVID, having been vaccinated reduces your risk of getting long COVID by a factor of 2.

 

Quoting the study:

Professor Tim Spector from King’s College London and Lead investigator of ZOE COVID Study comments: “Vaccinations are massively reducing the chances of people getting Long COVID in two ways.

 

Firstly, by reducing the risk of any symptoms by 8 to 10 fold and then by halving the chances of any infection turning into Long COVID, if it does happen.

 

Edited by Hip, 14 January 2022 - 04:18 AM.

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Post #188 provides a link to a news article reporting results of a King's College London study.

 

In the "Discussion" section of the study talked about in the link:

 

"Our study has some limitations. Although we used data from a large population of individuals reporting on a mobile phone app, the sample contained disproportionately more women than men and under-represented individuals in more deprived areas. Furthermore, we were unable to analyse the impact of ethnicity due to the low number of participants who provided this information, and our findings might not apply at all timepoints post-vaccination, to settings with different proportions of SARS-CoV-2 variants, or to countries with a different vaccination schedule. Additionally, the data were self-reported; recording of comorbidities, test results, and vaccination status might not have been completely accurate and there might have been temporal gaps in reporting. Users of the COVID Symptom Study app are asked to log daily; therefore, if a participant reports on alternate days, the proportion of missing daily entries is 50%. However, given the typical duration of COVID-19 symptoms, the sampling frequencies in the COVID Symptom Study should have allowed good characterisation of infections."

 

In other words, the cited study had a built-in self-selection bias in that it utilized people (including disproportionately more women, and under-representation of minorities) who chose to participate by using an app to report results to the researchers. (Insert classic "grain of salt" idiom here.)

[Hip]

In other words, the cited study had a built-in self-selection bias in that it utilized people (including disproportionately more women, and under-representation of minorities) who chose to participate by using an app to report results to the researchers. (Insert classic "grain of salt" idiom here.)

 

Long COVID hits women 4 times more often than it hits men (this data comes from one of the surveys conducted by a long COVID group). 

 

ME/CFS is the same, its female to male ratio is 4:1. 

 

Thus not perhaps surprising that more women answered the app survey than men.

 

 

 

Irrespective of this study, vaccination lowers you risk of catching COVID in the first place, and that of course reduces your long COVID risk, since there is no long COVID without first having COVID.

[Daniel Cooper]

This is just anecdotal and anecdotal on a very small sample size, so not worth a whole lot.

 

My observation has been that the vaccine seems to have done a reasonable job of preventing symptomatic infection until omicron became the dominate variant. A small percentage of the people that I knew that got covid were vaccinated until the last two weeks or so when as far as I can tell omicron started to became the dominate strain in my area.

 

Since then however, of the six people that I am aware of in my personal sphere of acquaintances that have contracted covid, to a person every single one of them has been vaccinated and most have been boosted. I'm not the only person that has commented on this observation either and others are saying the same thing.

 

We've had a lot of covid cases in my area since the start of the pandemic. If I look at the reported cases, and apply the CDC's estimate that for every diagnosed case of covid that there are 4.3 undiagnosed cases, then a pretty high percentage of my state's population has had covid (well over half).

 

I wonder if it could be that those that have had covid and now have some natural immunity are not getting symptomatic infections of omicron because they have a broad based immune response not limited to just the spike protein that the vaccines are active against. Now that we have a variant that has a large number of mutations associated with the spike protein, it seems logical that the vaccinated who avoided the previous strains but only have an immune response to spike are now getting preferentially infected as opposed to those with a natural immunity that is not limited to spike. It does make sense that this would happen to the first variant with a lot of mutations of the exclusive factor that all the vaccines are active against.

 

In any case, it's very noticeable in my area that the vaccinated now seem to be the ones getting infected. It will be interesting to see if the data bears this observation out.

 

[Gal220]

In any case, it's very noticeable in my area that the vaccinated now seem to be the ones getting infected. It will be interesting to see if the data bears this observation out.

 

Dnmark is showing omicron prefers people vaccinated

https://twitter.com/...853178699354112

https://twitter.com/...978741047537675

 

 

Women in general are reporting significantly more side effects than men to the jab(EU database).  Something they should be informed about along with their age/health risk.

https://ukfreedompro...ta 9-6-2021.pdf

 

"the vast majority (72%) of reported ADRs have occurred among women."

 

This report was before 30 and below started vaccination, may have evened out for that age group with myocarditis

Edited by Gal220, 14 January 2022 - 06:38 AM.

[Gal220]

Irrespective of this study, vaccination lowers you risk of catching COVID in the first place, and that of course reduces your long COVID risk, since there is no long COVID without first having COVID.

 

"Vaccines seem to cause a version of long COVID that responds to long COVID treatment"

https://glennchan.wo...tively-treated/

 

From another source

https://twitter.com/...716226339598336

 

 

Treatment site

https://covidlonghaulers.com/

Edited by Gal220, 14 January 2022 - 06:47 AM.

[DanCG]

From post #186:

 

"In the Discussion, they mention all of the predictors except vaccination. It’s like they don’t want to talk about it."

 

From the discussion section of the study cited in post #186:

 

"An observational paradox in our study was that the participants who took two doses of COVID-19 vaccination had higher odds of developing Long COVID. It could be due to better survival in vaccinated individuals who may continue to exhibit symptoms of COVID-19 disease. But we could not find any literature on this association, and based on this study, we cannot imply causation. Age and sex, which was commonly found to be associated with Long COVID was not a significant predictor in our study. Cycle threshold (Ct) values of two genes were also not a significant predictor of Long COVID.".  (my emphasis)

 

Good catch. I missed that. 

[DanCG]

 

A study by King’s College London found that if you catch COVID, having been vaccinated reduces your risk of getting long COVID by a factor of 2.

 

Quoting the study:

 

 

 

 

Well, that is the result I would have expected. That's why I posted the link to a study that seemed to show otherwise. It seemed so odd.

[Mind]

Like so many other countries, Alberta had an explosion of cases and deaths soon after a widespread injections.

 

I am getting a little freaked-out about the data coming out about rising mortality in working age people - increasing around 40% this year. An insurance industry CEO recently said their claims have risen 40% this year for 18-64 year-olds.

 

 

 

“Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three-sigma or a one-in-200-year catastrophe would be 10% increase over pre-pandemic,” he said. “So 40% is just unheard of.”

 

Of course, there are people who speculate that the injections are harmful (and VAERS data is correct...and underreported), but others would argue that the pandemic restrictions caused a lot of poor health choices/depression/drug abuse, and that is why mortality is rising so much.

[geo12the]

Like so many other countries, Alberta had an explosion of cases and deaths soon after a widespread injections.

I am getting a little freaked-out about the data coming out about rising mortality in working age people - increasing around 40% this year. An insurance industry CEO recently said their claims have risen 40% this year for 18-64 year-olds.


Of course, there are people who speculate that the injections are harmful (and VAERS data is correct...and underreported), but others would argue that the pandemic restrictions caused a lot of poor health choices/depression/drug abuse, and that is why mortality is rising so much.

The pandemic is winding down. The current data still show vaccines are keeping folks out of the hospital and keeping them from dying. The anti vaxxers are still spewing out their propaganda because for them it's more important that they are right than they are actually correct. Whatever. I am over showing data that the vaccienes work and having it ignored. At the end of the day this is the reality:

1) Over time many viruses evolve to escape human immune responses. Good examples are flu and the common cold. COVID is doing the same. It's not going away. But it won't be as big a threat because our immune systems have been introduced to it by infection or vaccination or both. Every year people can get the flu vaccine which is formulated to protect against the latest flu variants. It's clear COVID will probably be a similar situation. Me personally I despise being sick, even with a cold. Before covid I always was extra careful during cold and flu season. When I did catch colds it was always from my spouse who was less careful. If wearing a mask had not been socially awkward before Covid I would have worn a mask when I was shopping during cold season. I will wear a mask when shopping at Target or the market and get vaccinated because I hate being sick. It's not that complicated. The debating at this point and cherry picking of data and twisting facts to bend reality that vaccines are bad is wearing thin. It's over. Most people are vaccinated. The vaccines saved tons of lives. I don't care how important it is that the anti vax folks get validation. It's over. You lost. Move on.

Edited by geo12the, 14 January 2022 - 07:29 PM.

[Gal220]

Update on myocarditis - link

 

"The stunning increase in myocarditis rates after the vaccines rolled out"

[geo12the]

Update on myocarditis - link

"The stunning increase in myocarditis rates after the vaccines rolled out"

Myocarditis also linked to COVID:

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/33088905/

[geo12the]

Update on myocarditis - link

 

"The stunning increase in myocarditis rates after the vaccines rolled out"

 

 More on Myocarditis here, risk is higher in people who get COVID (40 per million) compared to vaxxed (6 per million):

 

Risks of myocarditis, pericarditis, and cardiac arrhythmias associated with COVID-19 vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection

 

Nature Medicine (2021)Cite this article

• 453k Accesses

• 2 Citations

• 9358 Altmetric

• Metricsdetails

Abstract

Although myocarditis and pericarditis were not observed as adverse events in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine trials, there have been numerous reports of suspected cases following vaccination in the general population. We undertook a self-controlled case series study of people aged 16 or older vaccinated for COVID-19 in England between 1 December 2020 and 24 August 2021 to investigate hospital admission or death from myocarditis, pericarditis and cardiac arrhythmias in the 1–28 days following adenovirus (ChAdOx1, n = 20,615,911) or messenger RNA-based (BNT162b2, n = 16,993,389; mRNA-1273, n = 1,006,191) vaccines or a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positive test (n = 3,028,867). We found increased risks of myocarditis associated with the first dose of ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 vaccines and the first and second doses of the mRNA-1273 vaccine over the 1–28 days postvaccination period, and after a SARS-CoV-2 positive test. We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273. This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test. We also observed increased risks of pericarditis and cardiac arrhythmias following a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Similar associations were not observed with any of the COVID-19 vaccines, apart from an increased risk of arrhythmia following a second dose of mRNA-1273. Subgroup analyses by age showed the increased risk of myocarditis associated with the two mRNA vaccines was present only in those younger than 40.

 

Edited by geo12the, 15 January 2022 - 05:17 PM.

[Mind]

The pandemic is winding down. The current data still show vaccines are keeping folks out of the hospital and keeping them from dying. The anti vaxxers are still spewing out their propaganda because for them it's more important that they are right than they are actually correct. Whatever. I am over showing data that the vaccienes work and having it ignored. At the end of the day this is the reality:

1) Over time many viruses evolve to escape human immune responses. Good examples are flu and the common cold. COVID is doing the same. It's not going away. But it won't be as big a threat because our immune systems have been introduced to it by infection or vaccination or both. Every year people can get the flu vaccine which is formulated to protect against the latest flu variants. It's clear COVID will probably be a similar situation. Me personally I despise being sick, even with a cold. Before covid I always was extra careful during cold and flu season. When I did catch colds it was always from my spouse who was less careful. If wearing a mask had not been socially awkward before Covid I would have worn a mask when I was shopping during cold season. I will wear a mask when shopping at Target or the market and get vaccinated because I hate being sick. It's not that complicated. The debating at this point and cherry picking of data and twisting facts to bend reality that vaccines are bad is wearing thin. It's over. Most people are vaccinated. The vaccines saved tons of lives. I don't care how important it is that the anti vax folks get validation. It's over. You lost. Move on.

 

I am not sure it is correct to say that the COVID injections played much of a part ending the pandemic (nor masks, nor isolation, nor lockdowns, nor plexiglass barriers, nor sanitation...etc). It might be ending now because the Omicron variant is spreading to everyone, injected or not, mask wearing or not. Preliminary data indicates the injections kept more people from dying, but they did nothing to stop the pandemic.

 

Nature took its course. Everyone is getting natural immunity. We just had to go through a whole lot of needless tyranny, mental strife, suffering, to get to this point.

 

What was all the denial of natural immunity about anyway? What a bizarre and anti-scientific episode we had to go through. 

Edited by Mind, 16 January 2022 - 08:48 PM.

[Mind]

MIT researcher speculates about negative side effects of the COVID injections.

 

Nothing too concrete, mostly speculation, because it is hard to get data about side effects. The people having severe issues from the injections are essentially ignored or treated as pariahs by the current US government and health bureaucracy. Like this fighter pilot.

[xEva]

 

 More on Myocarditis here, risk is higher in people who get COVID (40 per million) compared to vaxxed (6 per million):

 

Risks of myocarditis, pericarditis, and cardiac arrhythmias associated with COVID-19 vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection

 

Nature Medicine (2021)Cite this article

• 453k Accesses

• 2 Citations

• 9358 Altmetric

• Metricsdetails

Abstract

Although myocarditis and pericarditis were not observed as adverse events in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine trials, there have been numerous reports of suspected cases following vaccination in the general population. We undertook a self-controlled case series study of people aged 16 or older vaccinated for COVID-19 in England between 1 December 2020 and 24 August 2021 to investigate hospital admission or death from myocarditis, pericarditis and cardiac arrhythmias in the 1–28 days following adenovirus (ChAdOx1, n = 20,615,911) or messenger RNA-based (BNT162b2, n = 16,993,389; mRNA-1273, n = 1,006,191) vaccines or a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positive test (n = 3,028,867). We found increased risks of myocarditis associated with the first dose of ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 vaccines and the first and second doses of the mRNA-1273 vaccine over the 1–28 days postvaccination period, and after a SARS-CoV-2 positive test. We estimated an extra two (95% confidence interval (CI) 0, 3), one (95% CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million people vaccinated with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively, in the 28 days following a first dose and an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million vaccinated in the 28 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273. This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million patients in the 28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test. We also observed increased risks of pericarditis and cardiac arrhythmias following a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Similar associations were not observed with any of the COVID-19 vaccines, apart from an increased risk of arrhythmia following a second dose of mRNA-1273. Subgroup analyses by age showed the increased risk of myocarditis associated with the two mRNA vaccines was present only in those younger than 40.

 

 

 

actually the most interesting part of the abstract is in the end:

 

 We also observed increased risks of pericarditis and cardiac arrhythmias following a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Similar associations were not observed with any of the COVID-19 vaccines, apart from an increased risk of arrhythmia following a second dose of mRNA-1273. 

 

 

Subgroup analyses by age showed the increased risk of myocarditis associated with the two mRNA vaccines was present only in those younger than 40.

 

In other words:

 

increased risk of arrhythmias was observed following a second dose of mRNA-1273 (Moderna)

 

increased risk of myocarditis with the two mRNA vaccines (both Pfizer and Moderna) was observed in those under 40.

 

I.e. for those under 40, the risk of either myocarditis or arrhythmias was higher in the vaccinated group.

 

The Botton line of this paper is actually old news: vaccines make sense only in the high mortality from covid group (older than 40 and then even much older). For the younger, healthier cohort, vaccines pose more risk than natural infection.

[Hip]

The Botton line of this paper is actually old news: vaccines make sense only in the high mortality from covid group (older than 40 and then even much older). For the younger, healthier cohort, vaccines pose more risk than natural infection.

 

Presumably you have not heard of long COVID, because this risk calculation does not take that dire outcome into account. The ME/CFS form is likely a lifelong illness, and it can get so bad that some long COVID patients are already killing themselves. About 1 in 100 COVID patients get the ME/CFS form of long COVID. 

[Hip]

Nature took its course. Everyone is getting natural immunity.  

 

Long COVID patients are not getting natural immunity: they have ongoing viral illness; the virus has not been cleared from their bodies. 

 

These long COVID patients were often previously healthy young people with no underlying illness. But the SARS-CoV-2 virus hit them, and their immune systems were unable to clear it from their bodies.

 

So much for natural immunity.

[xEva]

Ha! Check this out. Chriss Matterson reports on the New Zealand data that shows strong "temporal association" between vaccines and uptick in all-cause mortality:

 

 

And I wonder if you remember an eminent professor of statistics of an American Uni who compared all-cause mortality of two prepdandemic years  with all-cause mortality, per age group, as vaccines were rolled out.  (was the link posted in this thread? -- it was in summer 2021).   His graphs were very telling.  Now we have "clean" (uncomplicated by concurrent spread of the disease)  New Zealand data which confirms his findings.

Edited by xEva, 19 January 2022 - 03:10 PM.

[Hip]

Ha! Check this out. Chriss Matterson reports on the New Zealand data that shows strong "temporal association" between vaccines and uptick in all-cause mortality:

 

 

Chris Martenson is cherry picking data, and not saying anything new.

 

His graph at timecode 12:15 is only looking at older people in the 60+ age group. He points out in this group, there is a slight increase in all cause deaths as the vaccine was rolled out to this age group.

 

But it was known right at the beginning of the vaccine rollout that it would sometimes kill very frail older people (much like such very frail people might be killed by getting the flu). And it was advised that for the very frail, they would have to make a decision regarding whether they wanted vaccine protection or not.

 

This data is also deceptive, as it applies to New Zealand, where there has more or less been no COVID. So in this graph, you are only measuring the negative effects of the vaccine (the slight risk of death in frail elderly populations), but not measuring its protective effect against COVID, where it saves lives. That's totally unfair.

[geo12the]

Ha! Check this out. Chriss Matterson reports on the New Zealand data that shows strong "temporal association" between vaccines and uptick in all-cause mortality:

 

And I wonder if you remember an eminent professor of statistics of an American Uni who compared all-cause mortality of two prepdandemic years  with all-cause mortality, per age group, as vaccines were rolled out.  (was the link posted in this thread? -- it was in summer 2021).   His graphs were very telling.  Now we have "clean" (uncomplicated by concurrent spread of the disease)  New Zealand data which confirms his findings.

 

For most of the video he is pontificating and bloviating, making dramatic statements without anything but vague conjecture to back them up. The data does not hold up, because, even though NZ was not hit as hard with COVID as other places, all cause mortality in the 60+ age group would include people who died of COVID. So it's impossible to distinguish how much of the all cause mortality is due to COVID deaths and how much is due to vaccine effects. Charlatans like this guy are making money from riling the emotions of gullible people desperate for their fringe views to be validated by someone. Why do you allow yourself to be taken in by these people? 

[xEva]

Chris Martenson is cherry picking data, and not saying anything new.

 

His graph at timecode 12:15 is only looking at older people in the 60+ age group. He points out in this group, there is a slight increase in all cause deaths as the vaccine was rolled out to this age group.

 

But it was known right at the beginning of the vaccine rollout that it would sometimes kill very frail older people (much like such very frail people might be killed by getting the flu). And it was advised that for the very frail, they would have to make a decision regarding whether they wanted vaccine protection or not.

 

This data is also deceptive, as it applies to New Zealand, where there has more or less been no COVID. So in this graph, you are only measuring the negative effects of the vaccine (the slight risk of death in frail elderly populations), but not measuring its protective effect against COVID, where it saves lives. That's totally unfair.

 

 

Actually the New Zealand data is free of the confounding factor of "no COVID". The US data (I think I saw the link in this thread around midsummer -?)  --so the US data shows  even higher uptick in deaths  -- which happens to coincide with the vaccinations rollout in a given age group (and the US uptick is higher, coz it is aggravated by the concurrent deaths from the disease itself).

 

The point is that vaccines may have saved some lives but they have also took many others. And since there is no telling in advance with certainty who will get what in this lottery, it should be an individual choice, not a coercion. 

[Hip]

The point is that vaccines may have saved some lives but they have also took many others. And since there is no telling in advance with certainty who will get what in this lottery, it should be an individual choice, not a coercion. 

 

I agree it's hard to tell who will get vaccine side effects or death, but from that statement, it does not logically follow that it should be an individual choice.  

 

Vaccines have saved millions of lives, while perhaps killing thousands. So if saving life and preventing ill health from long COVID is our paramount concern, then logically it follows that vaccine should be encouraged and coerced. That does follow logically.

 

Those who are extremely frail due to age, and thus more likely to suffer adverse effects or death from the vaccine, should be advised that there are higher chances of adverse effects. But even for such frail people, the vaccine may still be a good choice, as the frail and elderly are also at very high risk from death by COVID.

 

If course, if you have different priorities, and you consider personal freedom more important than human life, and are happy to sacrifice the lives of millions for your belief in personal freedom, then you could logically argue for no vaccine coercion.