@metal-brain said"When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established.... The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event."
VAERS reported deaths by vaccines are underestimates.
@wildgrass saidYet nobody in government is interested in confirming cause-and-effect. They are beholden to big pharma and like the ambiguity so people like you can deny cause-and-effect.
"When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established.... The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event."
Even if half of them are caused by the vaccine you would have to multiply that halved number by 10. It is an underestimate and you are in denial of it.
@metal-brain saidThere were extensive randomized controlled trials with tens of thousands of people receiving vaccine or placebo. Check that data. VAERS data.cannot answer your question.
Yet nobody in government is interested in confirming cause-and-effect. They are beholden to big pharma and like the ambiguity so people like you can deny cause-and-effect.
Even if half of them are caused by the vaccine you would have to multiply that halved number by 10. It is an underestimate and you are in denial of it.
@wildgrass saidFunny you should mention that.
There were extensive randomized controlled trials with tens of thousands of people receiving vaccine or placebo. Check that data. VAERS data.cannot answer your question.
The placebo group was given the vaccine afterwards. That made the study of long term differences impossible. That amounts to fraud. Those randomized controlled trials were intentionally fraudulent to hide the long term effects of the gene vaccines by making the placebo group vaccinated as well.
Government needs to make an effort to confirm cause of deaths and make the numbers public instead of hiding the cause of deaths. Government has obviously been corrupted by big pharma. Stop condoning that corruption because of partisan bias. Reducing corruption should not be a partisan issue. It is in everyone's interest to reduce corruption.
@metal-brain said🚧🚨Moronity of Gop alert!!!🚨🚧
Funny you should mention that.
The placebo group was given the vaccine afterwards. That made the study of long term differences impossible. That amounts to fraud. Those randomized controlled trials were intentionally fraudulent to hide the long term effects of the gene vaccines by making the placebo group vaccinated as well.
Government needs to make an effort to co ...[text shortened]... ducing corruption should not be a partisan issue. It is in everyone's interest to reduce corruption.
@metal-brain saidIn the red corner, there are >3 multi-institution randomized controlled trials with 40,000 participants in each trial and safety data out to 6+ months.
Funny you should mention that.
The placebo group was given the vaccine afterwards. That made the study of long term differences impossible. That amounts to fraud. Those randomized controlled trials were intentionally fraudulent to hide the long term effects of the gene vaccines by making the placebo group vaccinated as well.
Government needs to make an effort to co ...[text shortened]... ducing corruption should not be a partisan issue. It is in everyone's interest to reduce corruption.
In the blue corner, you have a passive reporting website with no controls and no statistics and an explicit "no cause-effect relationship" disclaimer on the site's main page.
Who ya got to answer your question?
@wildgrass saidThe placebo group was given the vaccine afterwards. That made the study of long term differences impossible. That amounts to fraud. Those randomized controlled trials were intentionally fraudulent to hide the long term effects of the gene vaccines by making the placebo group vaccinated as well.
In the red corner, there are >3 multi-institution randomized controlled trials with 40,000 participants in each trial and safety data out to 6+ months.
In the blue corner, you have a passive reporting website with no controls and no statistics and an explicit "no cause-effect relationship" disclaimer on the site's main page.
Who ya got to answer your question?
@metal-brain saidFraud? When you say "afterwards" it was 6 months later which was the endpoint of the study and the clear intent of the trial and of all related publications. Sure, more data would be nice, but they then offered the vaccine to the placebo group. If you're not dead 6 months after taking a vaccine, I think the reasoning is what could possibly be the mechanism for death caused by vaccine after that? All the animal studies have shown that the mRNA only lasts 1-2 weeks in the body.
The placebo group was given the vaccine afterwards. That made the study of long term differences impossible. That amounts to fraud. Those randomized controlled trials were intentionally fraudulent to hide the long term effects of the gene vaccines by making the placebo group vaccinated as well.
@wildgrass saidSo you admit that any RCTs of side effects from the gene vaccines past 6 months have been eliminated by vaccinating the placebo group. Are you sure it was 6 months and not 6 weeks? What is your source of information?
Fraud? When you say "afterwards" it was 6 months later which was the endpoint of the study and the clear intent of the trial and of all related publications. Sure, more data would be nice, but they then offered the vaccine to the placebo group. If you're not dead 6 months after taking a vaccine, I think the reasoning is what could possibly be the mechanism for death caused ...[text shortened]... accine after that? All the animal studies have shown that the mRNA only lasts 1-2 weeks in the body.
"All the animal studies have shown that the mRNA only lasts 1-2 weeks in the body"
I have never heard that before and it doesn't make much sense. You needed a second jab how long after the first? Again, what is your source of information?
@metal-brain saidThere is tons of data about this that is controlled and studied. VAERS is crap for the question you're asking. Maybe we start with this? these are the same doctors who are reporting data to VAERS but are also enrolling patients in RCTs.
So you admit that any RCTs of side effects from the gene vaccines past 6 months have been eliminated by vaccinating the placebo group. Are you sure it was 6 months and not 6 weeks? What is your source of information?
"All the animal studies have shown that the mRNA only lasts 1-2 weeks in the body"
I have never heard that before and it doesn't make much sense. You needed a second jab how long after the first? Again, what is your source of information?
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v1
During the blinded, controlled period, 15 BNT162b2 and 14 placebo recipients died; during the open-label period, 3 BNT162b2 and 2 original placebo recipients who received BNT162b2 after unblinding died. None of these deaths were considered related to BNT162b2 by investigators. Causes of death were balanced between BNT162b2 and placebo groups (Table S4).
@metal-brain saidTo answer the question you have posed, I'm relying on the published data from randomized controlled trials conducted with safety data on vaccinated vs. placebo out to 6 months. Over this time period, deaths were balanced between the two groups.
If VAERS is crap why are you relying on VAERS?
I'm not disparaging the VAERS data. I am only pointing out that the data doesn't address your question.
@wildgrass saidIf you held covid deaths to the same standard as vaccine deaths you would get a lot lower number of covid deaths. You are condoning different standards for deaths by vaccine and deaths by covid. I think you know that is wrong.
To answer the question you have posed, I'm relying on the published data from randomized controlled trials conducted with safety data on vaccinated vs. placebo out to 6 months. Over this time period, deaths were balanced between the two groups.
I'm not disparaging the VAERS data. I am only pointing out that the data doesn't address your question.
1 edit
@metal-brain saidIt's raw numbers of deaths (irrespective of cause) in 40.000 randomized participants over a 6 month period. The only variable is the vaccine and there's no difference in number of deaths. I don't know how you can get more convincing data than that
If you held covid deaths to the same standard as vaccine deaths you would get a lot lower number of covid deaths. You are condoning different standards for deaths by vaccine and deaths by covid. I think you know that is wrong.