So I was Covid vaccine hesitant...

originally posted by: MDDoxs
a reply to: Randyvine2

That you
may be responsible for another human beings personal injury and/or death.

No more responsible than the anti-vaccination folks. If my hands are bloodied, then yours are drenched friend. Look in the mirror.

Hey it's safe because I did it!

Hey its safe not to do it, because I didnt. Durrrrrr...

Listen, the anti-vaccination folks are their own worse enemy. The shear insanity of some of their beliefs really undermines the legitimate concerns that exist. You have not helped the cause either.

Mate I'm gonna ask you the same question I ask someone in another thread relating to covid-19 .

With all of these post of yours supporting the vaccine and arguing for it .

Who exactly are you trying to convince ?

Everyone else or Your self ?

The fact that you say that "natural immunity has existed for centuries" seems to suggest that you are attributing a level of protection to it, that just doesn't happen. Life on Earth, and immune response to pathogens, has existed for far longer than "centuries", and it doesn't always work. That is why people still sometimes die of diseases they have recovered from previously.

a reply to: chr0naut

So then a Vaccine fixes this little snag yes ?

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow

The fact that you say that "natural immunity has existed for centuries" seems to suggest that you are attributing a level of protection to it, that just doesn't happen. Life on Earth, and immune response to pathogens, has existed for far longer than "centuries", and it doesn't always work. That is why people still sometimes die of diseases they have recovered from previously.

a reply to: chr0naut

So then a Vaccine fixes this little snag yes ?

Of course not. It's the same immune system, regardless of what generates the antibodies.

But about 2% of those that get the disease, die, but only About 0.000246% of those who have been vaccinated die.

Since it is quite likely that nearly everybody will get COVID-19 at some stage in their lives in future, the vaccine is a 10,000 times safer option.

(my calculations are based upon the following: [current deaths in VARES data where vaccine is COVID19] = 18,078, divided by [Current doses administered in Johns Hopkins COVID-19 dashboard] = 7,347,800,422 [multiplied by 100, to get a dose-mortality percentage] = 0.000246 %).

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow

The fact that you say that "natural immunity has existed for centuries" seems to suggest that you are attributing a level of protection to it, that just doesn't happen. Life on Earth, and immune response to pathogens, has existed for far longer than "centuries", and it doesn't always work. That is why people still sometimes die of diseases they have recovered from previously.

a reply to: chr0naut

So then a Vaccine fixes this little snag yes ?

Of course not. It's the same immune system, regardless of what generates the antibodies.

But about 2% of those that get the disease, die, but only About 0.000246% of those who have been vaccinated die

(my calculations are based upon the following: current deaths in VARES data where vaccine is COVID19 = 18,078, divided by Current doses administered in Johns Hopkins COVID-19 dashboard = 7,347,800,422 x 100, to get a dose-mortality percentage = 0.000246 %).

I trust those numbers mate ..well mostly I do.

But would you also trust that 2% is probably much much lower if you take into account comorbidity and hospitals mis-labeling Covid-19 as the cause of death for possible monetary gain and other things of that nature ?

it's possible even likely the real number is lower than 1% if you really cut through the smoke and find the ones that died from Covid-19 and only Covid-19.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow

The fact that you say that "natural immunity has existed for centuries" seems to suggest that you are attributing a level of protection to it, that just doesn't happen. Life on Earth, and immune response to pathogens, has existed for far longer than "centuries", and it doesn't always work. That is why people still sometimes die of diseases they have recovered from previously.

a reply to: chr0naut

So then a Vaccine fixes this little snag yes ?

Of course not. It's the same immune system, regardless of what generates the antibodies.

But about 2% of those that get the disease, die, but only About 0.000246% of those who have been vaccinated die.

Since it is quite likely that nearly everybody will get COVID-19 at some stage in their lives in future, the vaccine is a 10,000 times safer option.

(my calculations are based upon the following: [current deaths in VARES data where vaccine is COVID19] = 18,078, divided by [Current doses administered in Johns Hopkins COVID-19 dashboard] = 7,347,800,422 [multiplied by 100, to get a dose-mortality percentage] = 0.000246 %).

I would think both those numbers are overly high estimates. The number of cases is almost certainly higher than reported, most estimates seem to have the true IFR seem to be between 0.5 and 1%.

However VAERs is massively over counting vaccine deaths ( its not intended as a count). In UK the similar scheme has around 1500 deaths showing until August but there are only 9 deaths with vaccine recorded as cause on the death certificate.

Doesn't change your main point however.

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow

The fact that you say that "natural immunity has existed for centuries" seems to suggest that you are attributing a level of protection to it, that just doesn't happen. Life on Earth, and immune response to pathogens, has existed for far longer than "centuries", and it doesn't always work. That is why people still sometimes die of diseases they have recovered from previously.

a reply to: chr0naut

So then a Vaccine fixes this little snag yes ?

Of course not. It's the same immune system, regardless of what generates the antibodies.

But about 2% of those that get the disease, die, but only About 0.000246% of those who have been vaccinated die

(my calculations are based upon the following: current deaths in VARES data where vaccine is COVID19 = 18,078, divided by Current doses administered in Johns Hopkins COVID-19 dashboard = 7,347,800,422 x 100, to get a dose-mortality percentage = 0.000246 %).

I trust those numbers mate ..well mostly I do.

But would you also trust that 2% is probably much much lower if you take into account comorbidity and hospitals mis-labeling Covid-19 as the cause of death for possible monetary gain and other things of that nature ?

Why would they do that? How does it help anyone to manage the allocations and resourcing to mitigate against a disease that does actually kill people - even in cases where there is no comorbidity?

Also, about comorbidities, some of those things are stuff that people would live with for decades, things like obesity, or diabetes, or high blood pressure, or angina. Very few people do not have at least one of these comorbidities, especially after middle age.

The thing is, pneumonic illness, and ARDS, and lesions apparent on chest X-Rays, are really obvious symptoms of terminal COVID-19. The majority of deaths have had very clear and unambiguous symptoms, and any mention of deaths with COVID-19, and the assumption that the majority of COVID-19 deaths are from other things, is simply avoidance of the facts.

it's possible even likely the real number is lower than 1% if you really cut through the smoke and find the ones that died from Covid-19 and only Covid-19.

Every time that a disease spreads epidemically, there have always been deniers who say it isn't happening, and/or those that think it is a punishment from God, and/or is something that is being 'done to them' by some evil (and usually racially biased) conspiracy.

Here's a picture of some Americans protesting against mask wearing, suggesting it was a personal liberty issue - during the 1918 flu pandemic - which killed 50 million people worldwide in a few years:



Stupid, eh??!

a reply to: MDDoxs

There is no debate.

The shots are dangerous to all and fatal to many. And they don't work worth a damn.

It was planned years in advance, and there is ample evidence for that.

What's to debate?

When the debate has been lost, according to Socrates, slander becomes the tool of the loser. In other threads you have slandered and maligned LTC Long by making false statements about her.

Any debate was lost last year, and that point has been made many times since the clot shots have been taken.

Geraldo Calls Out Vaccinated Hypocrites At Fox News

originally posted by: Erno86

Geraldo Calls Out Vaccinated Hypocrites At Fox News

Lol
You bought into that whole al capones vault event the jerry springer photo negative arranged?

I am totally perplexed about something.

I talked to an old friend last night whom I hadn't spoken to in a while. I always considered her above average intelligence. When she told me she has had two jabs so far, I didn't pass judgment. I am of the belief that each person should decide what is best for them based on doing their own due diligence.

Then I asked her what she thought of the mRNA technology used in these "vaccines". She had never heard of it and wanted to know what mRNA is? !!! This is probably the case with most people. They just get it because their doctor recommends it.

originally posted by: mzinga
a reply to: SeaWorthy

Yup my 48 year old buddie from high school who died has some great antibodies. Also still has his 'I don't care if you've been vaccinated' banner on his facebook profile picture.

Have a few more friends and relatives who have went down from Covid.. Haven't met anyone in my circle who has had a vaccine complication yet though.. Especially one like death.. But oh well.. That is me..

Bad news about your mate, condolences.

Having said that, people die - all the time...the stats on influenza alone are startling...i remember another startling stat i heard on the morning news a few years ago or so here in the UK too...60,000 people, mostly elderly, died in one Winter season due to insufficient heating in the homes. They literally froze to death.

How i wonder, can we throw trillions upon trillions of £/$/Euros etc at this 'flu', which represents roughly 2 years of 'excess deaths' due to cold, when nothing was done to help prevent these people dying prematurely due to nothing but not being able to afford to properly heat their homes?

This happens year after year here...not always 60K, but often 20K, 30K and so on...yet nobody is clamouring to threaten government / politicians job security because of it are they.

Bloody travesty.

Just how dangerous is covid, in your opinion?

originally posted by: MDDoxs

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: MDDoxs

How much physical stress do you put yourself under on a regular basis? Is it comparable to these people? If not, then how do you know? You may be a ticking time bomb.

Because I survived the toxic vaccine. Many people on in this thread and on these boards continually tell my how deadly the vaccine is...it is a miracle I am still alive. So, though I may not possess their physicality, I must possess some form of exceptional characteristic...

(Psst, I really hope you have picked up on the sarcasm. If not, we cannot...we have a wider issue)

Have people worked out yet that Covid in the form released was never meant to kill too many? It was never a weapon of mass destruction in the conventional sense. It was only ever the doorway through which the vaccines could walk, and they are only the hallway to the main event.

This is not going to be a swift depopulation event, but it is an event. All those fabulously wealthy freaks who literally control our lives cannot yet live without us minions - but by the time the reality of Covid and it’s vaccine outriders becomes obvious they may well have another solution, a less organic solution.

Make no mistake, this was no accidental release. We are at the threshold of a brave new world, it’s just that most of us will not be invited in.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

I would think both those numbers are overly high estimates. The number of cases is almost certainly higher than reported, most estimates seem to have the true IFR seem to be between 0.5 and 1%.

However VAERs is massively over counting vaccine deaths ( its not intended as a count). In UK the similar scheme has around 1500 deaths showing until August but there are only 9 deaths with vaccine recorded as cause on the death certificate.

Doesn't change your main point however.

originally posted by: chr0naut

Of course not. It's the same immune system, regardless of what generates the antibodies.

But about 2% of those that get the disease, die, but only About 0.000246% of those who have been vaccinated die.

Since it is quite likely that nearly everybody will get COVID-19 at some stage in their lives in future, the vaccine is a 10,000 times safer option.

(my calculations are based upon the following: [current deaths in VARES data where vaccine is COVID19] = 18,078, divided by [Current doses administered in Johns Hopkins COVID-19 dashboard] = 7,347,800,422 [multiplied by 100, to get a dose-mortality percentage] = 0.000246 %).

It appears to me that neither of you know much about either relational databases or statistics. Sorry...

ALL of the online places where One might go to search the VAERS database have one serious error in common; NONE of them search for "distinct" "VAERSID". Which is to say that there can be several records with the same "VAERSID". These are all the same record, yet it gets counted several times. To avoid this the SQL language provides the "distinct" directive. It's not perfect, but if one limits the query return to only the "VAERSID" field an accurate count of records can be found.

The actual number of deaths associated with the covid19 vax: 8,268
This was obtained using the current VAERS dataset and this query:

SELECT distinct [VAERS_ID]
FROM [vaersData].[dbo].[allSymptoms]
where vax_type='covid19' and died is not null

Also, chr0naut; you can't use U.S. numbers with Global numbers (Scot...you should have caught this). So...the number of deaths is: 8268 and the number of vaccinations is: 434,486,889 (not 7 billion!) Giving a dose-mortality of 0.0019%.

Unfortunately, unlike what ScepticScot seems to think, VAERS is vastly, almost criminally, under-reported. Some estimate that VAERS is less than 1% of all adverse events. It is my understanding that there are many providers who are either ignorant of the reporting requirement, or choose to ignore it.

Lastly; How do you define a death 'caused' by the vax?

a reply to: MDDoxs Please explain what you don't understand about their projections?
www.macrotrends.net...#:~:text=World%20-%20Historical%20Death%20Rate%20Data%20%20,%20%20-0.320%25%20%2068%20more%2 0rows%20

a reply to: Jimy718 Classified as unvaxxed Covid19 death if not >14 days past date of 2nd shot.

originally posted by: Jimy718

originally posted by: ScepticScot

I would think both those numbers are overly high estimates. The number of cases is almost certainly higher than reported, most estimates seem to have the true IFR seem to be between 0.5 and 1%.

However VAERs is massively over counting vaccine deaths ( its not intended as a count). In UK the similar scheme has around 1500 deaths showing until August but there are only 9 deaths with vaccine recorded as cause on the death certificate.

Doesn't change your main point however.

originally posted by: chr0naut

Of course not. It's the same immune system, regardless of what generates the antibodies.

But about 2% of those that get the disease, die, but only About 0.000246% of those who have been vaccinated die.

Since it is quite likely that nearly everybody will get COVID-19 at some stage in their lives in future, the vaccine is a 10,000 times safer option.

(my calculations are based upon the following: [current deaths in VARES data where vaccine is COVID19] = 18,078, divided by [Current doses administered in Johns Hopkins COVID-19 dashboard] = 7,347,800,422 [multiplied by 100, to get a dose-mortality percentage] = 0.000246 %).

It appears to me that neither of you know much about either relational databases or statistics. Sorry...

ALL of the online places where One might go to search the VAERS database have one serious error in common; NONE of them search for "distinct" "VAERSID". Which is to say that there can be several records with the same "VAERSID". These are all the same record, yet it gets counted several times. To avoid this the SQL language provides the "distinct" directive. It's not perfect, but if one limits the query return to only the "VAERSID" field an accurate count of records can be found.

The actual number of deaths associated with the covid19 vax: 8,268
This was obtained using the current VAERS dataset and this query:

SELECT distinct [VAERS_ID]
FROM [vaersData].[dbo].[allSymptoms]
where vax_type='covid19' and died is not null

Also, chr0naut; you can't use U.S. numbers with Global numbers (Scot...you should have caught this). So...the number of deaths is: 8268 and the number of vaccinations is: 434,486,889 (not 7 billion!) Giving a dose-mortality of 0.0019%.

Unfortunately, unlike what ScepticScot seems to think, VAERS is vastly, almost criminally, under-reported. Some estimate that VAERS is less than 1% of all adverse events. It is my understanding that there are many providers who are either ignorant of the reporting requirement, or choose to ignore it.

Lastly; How do you define a death 'caused' by the vax?

Some questions immediately spring to mind about about your query. For example why would data be held in the DBO schema, why would you not count distinct and is the table structure not normalised that you are using string in your where clause?

Still that doesn't really matter as VAERs isn't a count vaccine deaths so the entire premise of your post is wrong.


ETA _ oh and please either use or don't use square brackets , they are redundant in that particular code but I can still live with them if used consistently as a preference. Switching between using and not makes the code ugly.

a reply to: oddnutz

Ya it sure does feel dangerous to be vaccinated if you are an active person. Feels like your heart is drowning or has a noose around it.

I hope the damage can be recovered from for most people.

Thoughts and prayers for those who died from the vaccine and will never recover.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Jimy718

originally posted by: ScepticScot

I would think both those numbers are overly high estimates. The number of cases is almost certainly higher than reported, most estimates seem to have the true IFR seem to be between 0.5 and 1%.

However VAERs is massively over counting vaccine deaths ( its not intended as a count). In UK the similar scheme has around 1500 deaths showing until August but there are only 9 deaths with vaccine recorded as cause on the death certificate.

Doesn't change your main point however.

originally posted by: chr0naut

Of course not. It's the same immune system, regardless of what generates the antibodies.

But about 2% of those that get the disease, die, but only About 0.000246% of those who have been vaccinated die.

Since it is quite likely that nearly everybody will get COVID-19 at some stage in their lives in future, the vaccine is a 10,000 times safer option.

(my calculations are based upon the following: [current deaths in VARES data where vaccine is COVID19] = 18,078, divided by [Current doses administered in Johns Hopkins COVID-19 dashboard] = 7,347,800,422 [multiplied by 100, to get a dose-mortality percentage] = 0.000246 %).

It appears to me that neither of you know much about either relational databases or statistics. Sorry...

ALL of the online places where One might go to search the VAERS database have one serious error in common; NONE of them search for "distinct" "VAERSID". Which is to say that there can be several records with the same "VAERSID". These are all the same record, yet it gets counted several times. To avoid this the SQL language provides the "distinct" directive. It's not perfect, but if one limits the query return to only the "VAERSID" field an accurate count of records can be found.

The actual number of deaths associated with the covid19 vax: 8,268
This was obtained using the current VAERS dataset and this query:

SELECT distinct [VAERS_ID]
FROM [vaersData].[dbo].[allSymptoms]
where vax_type='covid19' and died is not null

Also, chr0naut; you can't use U.S. numbers with Global numbers (Scot...you should have caught this). So...the number of deaths is: 8268 and the number of vaccinations is: 434,486,889 (not 7 billion!) Giving a dose-mortality of 0.0019%.

Unfortunately, unlike what ScepticScot seems to think, VAERS is vastly, almost criminally, under-reported. Some estimate that VAERS is less than 1% of all adverse events. It is my understanding that there are many providers who are either ignorant of the reporting requirement, or choose to ignore it.

Lastly; How do you define a death 'caused' by the vax?

Some questions immediately spring to mind about about your query. For example why would data be held in the DBO schema, why would you not count distinct and is the table structure not normalised that you are using string in your where clause?

Still that doesn't really matter as VAERs isn't a count vaccine deaths so the entire premise of your post is wrong.

ETA _ oh and please either use or don't use square brackets , they are redundant in that particular code but I can still live with them if used consistently as a preference. Switching between using and not makes the code ugly.

Why is the data held in a DBO schema; Partly because it is the easiest, and partly because it is the default on SQL Server. All of the tools I have make it easy to import "CSV" data into Excel and then into SQL Server. This gives me a powerful query engine which can give results far mor accurate than those on-line 'whiz-bangs'. The DBO schema is supplied by my machine; a "CSV" has no schema as it is just data with a list of "columns". Excel applies data typing and thus a sort of schema, but again "DBO" is default.

I have the entire VAERS database from 1990 to now.

"Why would you not count distinct"; I don't know! Distinct is not the default for a query, by not using it One receives all records whether or not it is a duplicate. Distinct isn't perfect either; IF another record is different enough, it may still get reported, even IF that record is logically an "extension" of another "parent" record.

Yes, the database table structure is "normalized", but, I don't know how that might affect whether I use a String in the "where" clause. I use that string because "VAX_TYPE" is an "nvarchar(255)"; so, yeah, a String.

The table "allsymptoms" BTW, is a "view" on the three tables that constitute the dataset. These three (3) tables are "joined" on the "VAERSID" data.

The "square brackets" are supplied by SSMS (SQL Server Management Studio). I typically don't edit those things out...old time saving habit, sorry.

No, VAERS is not a 'vaccine death counting' engine; It is a relational database. Which means that I can import it into a relational database engine such as SQL Server and then use the SQL programming language, along with another (C++ or C#) to extract other data; such as the number of deaths associated with a given vaccine. I can get other information too; like the distribution of adverse events (by vaccine type, lot number, and state), and that just scratches the surface.

This method allows me to "see" things in this dataset that you just can't "see" any other way.