| The kids are seeing sense 07:24 - Sep 7 with 6613 views | builthjack |
75% of 16 /17 year olds have now been vaccinated in Powys.
Dont tell Stumpy, he will have kittens. |  |
| Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
|
| |  |
| The kids are seeing sense on 20:41 - Sep 10 with 744 views | ExiledJack |
| The kids are seeing sense on 20:27 - Sep 10 by Scotia |
Nope. No correction needed.
You've either misrepresented the article or misunderstood it.
Where does it discuss hospitalisation due to vaccine induced myocarditis? |
The title of the article is “Teenage boys more at risk from vaccines than Covid”. Are you claiming that both my understanding of the article and the accompanying headline are misleading?
“ A team led by Dr Tracy Hoeg at the University of California investigated the rate of cardiac myocarditis - heart inflammation — and chest pain in children aged 12-17 following their second dose of the vaccine.
They then compared this with the likelihood of children needing hospital treatment owing to Covid-19, at times of low, moderate and high rates of hospitalisation.
Researchers found that the risk of heart complications for boys aged 12-15 following the vaccine was 162.2 per million, which was the highest out of all the groups they looked at.
Evidence from studies show it is unlikely for boys to suffer either heart problems from the vaccine or be hospitalised by Covid.
The second highest rate was among boys aged 16-17 (94.0 per million) followed by girls aged 16-17 (13.4 per million) and girls aged 12-15 (13.0 per million).
Meanwhile, the risk of a healthy boy needing hospital treatment owing to Covid-19 in the next 120 days is 26.7 per million. This means the risk they face from heart complications is 6.1 times higher than that of hospitalisation.
This is based on current rates of hospitalisations from Covid-19, which are judged to be “moderate”. During a period of low risk of hospitalisation, such as June 2021, the likelihood of heart complications rises to 22.8 times higher, and during a period of high risk, such as January 2021, the likelihood of heart complications is still 4.3 times higher.” |  | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 20:50 - Sep 10 with 732 views | Catullus |
| The kids are seeing sense on 12:35 - Sep 10 by RonaldStump |
Oh yes they are and the VAERS/MRHA website will back that up even though as little as 10 % of adverse reactions are reported.
The hospitals are full of vaccinated people, all of the ones that have only had the one jab are classed as unvax.
You're going to be devastated this winter when the numbers will prove beyond reasonable doubt that it is infact the Vax that are taking up the hospital beds.
I genuinely will be very pleased and relieved if you prove me wrong on that fact but the way things are shaping up I just can't see it. |
Talking of absurdly wild claims. Tell me, if 90% of adverse reactions aren't reported, how does anybody know about them? In which case how can they put a number to them? That is all guesswork. If we assume that guess is accurate then those adverse probably aren't reported because they are very mild. For example, myself and my wife both had 'adverse reactions' to the vaccine, she had a headache and some aches and pains for a few hours, I felt a bit grotty, like a very mild hangover for a few hours. People don't report the mildest symptoms because they're nothing to worry about.
One jab is not fully vaxed, 43.7 million are fully vaxed, another 4.6 million have had one jab. If you aren't fully vaccinated you are not adequately protected, it's not hard. Some 19 million have had no jabs, most of them are young people and children. Young people are being hospitalised, teens are being intubated. | |
| |
| The kids are seeing sense on 20:54 - Sep 10 with 731 views | Scotia |
| The kids are seeing sense on 20:41 - Sep 10 by ExiledJack |
The title of the article is “Teenage boys more at risk from vaccines than Covid”. Are you claiming that both my understanding of the article and the accompanying headline are misleading?
“ A team led by Dr Tracy Hoeg at the University of California investigated the rate of cardiac myocarditis - heart inflammation — and chest pain in children aged 12-17 following their second dose of the vaccine.
They then compared this with the likelihood of children needing hospital treatment owing to Covid-19, at times of low, moderate and high rates of hospitalisation.
Researchers found that the risk of heart complications for boys aged 12-15 following the vaccine was 162.2 per million, which was the highest out of all the groups they looked at.
Evidence from studies show it is unlikely for boys to suffer either heart problems from the vaccine or be hospitalised by Covid.
The second highest rate was among boys aged 16-17 (94.0 per million) followed by girls aged 16-17 (13.4 per million) and girls aged 12-15 (13.0 per million).
Meanwhile, the risk of a healthy boy needing hospital treatment owing to Covid-19 in the next 120 days is 26.7 per million. This means the risk they face from heart complications is 6.1 times higher than that of hospitalisation.
This is based on current rates of hospitalisations from Covid-19, which are judged to be “moderate”. During a period of low risk of hospitalisation, such as June 2021, the likelihood of heart complications rises to 22.8 times higher, and during a period of high risk, such as January 2021, the likelihood of heart complications is still 4.3 times higher.” |
The headline may be misleading, that's MSM for you hey? But you're misunderstanding or misrepresting it.
That's exactly what I'm claiming, you pasting part of the article makes no difference.
Question everything, even if you don't want to.
I'll ask again. Where does it state that hospitalisation due to vaccine induced myocarditis is greater than hospitalisation due to covid? | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 21:13 - Sep 10 with 703 views | A_Fans_Dad |
Exiledjack, do you see how this works now.
You quote the Study, scotia says you are wrong and have to prove a point he selects that the study doesn't cover because it doesn't have to.
This is his MO for all actual data, regardless of the subject.
It doesn't matter what you post unless you address his requirements he will rubbish whatever you say and say you are wrong, even though you are quoting exactly what the experts say.
He will continue to ask the same question over and over again.
If that doesn't work he will probably try and find something on the "experts" to rubbish what they say.
I have been down that route dozens of times and it is a total waste of time and effort.
You have made your point. | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 21:31 - Sep 10 with 711 views | Scotia |
| The kids are seeing sense on 21:13 - Sep 10 by A_Fans_Dad |
Exiledjack, do you see how this works now.
You quote the Study, scotia says you are wrong and have to prove a point he selects that the study doesn't cover because it doesn't have to.
This is his MO for all actual data, regardless of the subject.
It doesn't matter what you post unless you address his requirements he will rubbish whatever you say and say you are wrong, even though you are quoting exactly what the experts say.
He will continue to ask the same question over and over again.
If that doesn't work he will probably try and find something on the "experts" to rubbish what they say.
I have been down that route dozens of times and it is a total waste of time and effort.
You have made your point. |
Let me interpret.
Scotia is right. | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 22:42 - Sep 10 with 657 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The kids are seeing sense on 21:31 - Sep 10 by Scotia |
Let me interpret.
Scotia is right. |
No the correct interpretation is scotia is a total big head who knows better than anyone else and is never wrong, especially when he is. | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 22:53 - Sep 10 with 664 views | Scotia |
| The kids are seeing sense on 22:42 - Sep 10 by A_Fans_Dad |
No the correct interpretation is scotia is a total big head who knows better than anyone else and is never wrong, especially when he is. |
I'll ask again in that case. I know you love a question you can't / won't answer AFD (I know it's both 😉)
Where does it state that hospitalisation due to vaccine induced myocarditis is greater than hospitalisation due to covid?
Please tell me where, from the article that exiled Jack quoted. I'm not asking anything particularly complicated am I? | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 23:49 - Sep 10 with 638 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The kids are seeing sense on 22:53 - Sep 10 by Scotia |
I'll ask again in that case. I know you love a question you can't / won't answer AFD (I know it's both 😉)
Where does it state that hospitalisation due to vaccine induced myocarditis is greater than hospitalisation due to covid?
Please tell me where, from the article that exiled Jack quoted. I'm not asking anything particularly complicated am I? |
It doesn't tell you in the article, it tells you in the study, which you have not read and I have.
Not only that but the study hospitalisations were only for CAEs whereas the COVID hospitalisations were for any reason at all.
So you see as usual you don't know how to find and analyse data and just grasp at straws while shouting your mouth off. [Post edited 11 Sep 2021 0:03]
| | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The kids are seeing sense on 07:46 - Sep 11 with 610 views | Scotia |
| The kids are seeing sense on 23:49 - Sep 10 by A_Fans_Dad |
It doesn't tell you in the article, it tells you in the study, which you have not read and I have.
Not only that but the study hospitalisations were only for CAEs whereas the COVID hospitalisations were for any reason at all.
So you see as usual you don't know how to find and analyse data and just grasp at straws while shouting your mouth off. [Post edited 11 Sep 2021 0:03]
|
No it doesn't.
https://www.medrxiv.org/conten
It's comparing different things, as I've said it doesn't compare vaccine induced myocarditis with virus induced myocarditis. Far from all cases of myocarditis after vaccination resulted in hospitalisation, it's likely that is the case for myocarditis following infection too. | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 09:45 - Sep 11 with 589 views | Professor |
| The kids are seeing sense on 00:22 - Sep 10 by londonlisa2001 |
There is no evidence that older people fully vaccinated 6 months ago now are effectively unvaccinated though. Given they’re not all now being hospitalised again. I know the antibody tests show a drop in immunity but the real world isn’t as simple as that otherwise hospitalisations would have been rising sharply again in the over 70s. |
Antibody levels always drop over time. There is a fundamental issue that immunology is generally poorly understood, even by many medics. The immune system is not some ‘force field’ or missile defence system. Antibody is an effector molecule. It is a glycoprotein which has a metabolic cost to produce,
so it’s produced as needed with limited amounts left circulating. The virus neutralisation tests are easy to perform. They measure that level. What they don’t determine is memory-carried by long-lived B and T memory cells. That’s hard enough to do in animal models let alone patients. Whilst it’s clear there’s some drop in protection (again entirely expected) it’s also clear there remains very strong protection against severe disease. The PHE report clearly shows over 90%’protection against hospitalisation or death in 30-60 age range, falling to 75% in older groups.
Again predictable. Reporting is, again predictably, either feast
Or famine. The efficacy of vaccines in adults is clear.
The idiocy of suggesting marginally effective or clearly ineffective treatment
Is somehow preferable to a preventative vaccine is perhaps the most stupid and ill-informed opinion seen on this forum. One borne of limited understanding and reading what at best is misinformation. At worst lies targeted to manipulate. | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 10:43 - Sep 11 with 579 views | Professor |
| The kids are seeing sense on 07:46 - Sep 11 by Scotia |
No it doesn't.
https://www.medrxiv.org/conten
It's comparing different things, as I've said it doesn't compare vaccine induced myocarditis with virus induced myocarditis. Far from all cases of myocarditis after vaccination resulted in hospitalisation, it's likely that is the case for myocarditis following infection too. |
It will struggle to get through peer review. It’s not a like-for-like comparison by any means. Using the VAERS data which is self-reported is also an issue as there is no definitive clinical diagnosis performed independently. VAERS is completely unverified. There is an increasing suspicion that false or over-stated adverse reactions to SARS CoV2 vaccines have been included by anti-vaccine
Groups. | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 12:50 - Sep 11 with 546 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The kids are seeing sense on 07:46 - Sep 11 by Scotia |
No it doesn't.
https://www.medrxiv.org/conten
It's comparing different things, as I've said it doesn't compare vaccine induced myocarditis with virus induced myocarditis. Far from all cases of myocarditis after vaccination resulted in hospitalisation, it's likely that is the case for myocarditis following infection too. |
Perhaps you missed this sentence?
"The CDC [2,6] reported a 94-96% hospitalization rate for VAERS-identified myocarditis."
As I pointed out the COVID hospitalisations are not just for CAEs, they were just hospitalisations with and without comorbidities.
I don't see anywhere that they were for only CAEs.
To make a proper comparison you also need to know how many vaccinated 12-17 year olds suffered from
Aphasia
Encephalopathy
Dyspnoea
Paralysis
Kidney failure
Hypoxia
Guillain-Barre syndrome
Transverse myelitis
Blood clots
Tremors
Vision concerns
All of which have been reported on VAERs and can require hospitalisation as well. | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 14:20 - Sep 11 with 540 views | Scotia |
| The kids are seeing sense on 12:50 - Sep 11 by A_Fans_Dad |
Perhaps you missed this sentence?
"The CDC [2,6] reported a 94-96% hospitalization rate for VAERS-identified myocarditis."
As I pointed out the COVID hospitalisations are not just for CAEs, they were just hospitalisations with and without comorbidities.
I don't see anywhere that they were for only CAEs.
To make a proper comparison you also need to know how many vaccinated 12-17 year olds suffered from
Aphasia
Encephalopathy
Dyspnoea
Paralysis
Kidney failure
Hypoxia
Guillain-Barre syndrome
Transverse myelitis
Blood clots
Tremors
Vision concerns
All of which have been reported on VAERs and can require hospitalisation as well. |
Nope I didn't miss that and you're completely missing the point.
The comparison is based on a tiny snap shot of self reported side effects and disregards myocarditis that may be associated with covid infection.
Many episodes of myocarditis associated with infection will not be reported as symptoms are similar to covid. That isn't the case after vaccination.
I'll be honest I don't think the paper is particularly useful, except to be jumped on by anti vaxxers to draw the wrong conclusions from. | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 16:07 - Sep 11 with 515 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The kids are seeing sense on 09:45 - Sep 11 by Professor |
Antibody levels always drop over time. There is a fundamental issue that immunology is generally poorly understood, even by many medics. The immune system is not some ‘force field’ or missile defence system. Antibody is an effector molecule. It is a glycoprotein which has a metabolic cost to produce,
so it’s produced as needed with limited amounts left circulating. The virus neutralisation tests are easy to perform. They measure that level. What they don’t determine is memory-carried by long-lived B and T memory cells. That’s hard enough to do in animal models let alone patients. Whilst it’s clear there’s some drop in protection (again entirely expected) it’s also clear there remains very strong protection against severe disease. The PHE report clearly shows over 90%’protection against hospitalisation or death in 30-60 age range, falling to 75% in older groups.
Again predictable. Reporting is, again predictably, either feast
Or famine. The efficacy of vaccines in adults is clear.
The idiocy of suggesting marginally effective or clearly ineffective treatment
Is somehow preferable to a preventative vaccine is perhaps the most stupid and ill-informed opinion seen on this forum. One borne of limited understanding and reading what at best is misinformation. At worst lies targeted to manipulate. |
"The idiocy of suggesting marginally effective or clearly ineffective treatment Is somehow preferable to a preventative vaccine is perhaps the most stupid and ill-informed opinion seen on this forum."
That is a typical snyde statement from someone who can't see the wood for the trees.
It should never have been about about Either or, it should have been about complimentary treatments, which you still don't get.
Real people with families are dying at the rate of about 100 a day, many of them double vaccinated.
How many of them could have been saved with the proper medical treatment?
You don't want to know do you?
I am not just talking about HCQ & Ivermectin, there are quite a few other including REGEN which is authorised for use here.
I wonder how many patients have actually been treated with it?
The only one we here about is DEXAMETHASONE, which is way less effective than many other medicines. | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 17:29 - Sep 11 with 501 views | Professor |
| The kids are seeing sense on 16:07 - Sep 11 by A_Fans_Dad |
"The idiocy of suggesting marginally effective or clearly ineffective treatment Is somehow preferable to a preventative vaccine is perhaps the most stupid and ill-informed opinion seen on this forum."
That is a typical snyde statement from someone who can't see the wood for the trees.
It should never have been about about Either or, it should have been about complimentary treatments, which you still don't get.
Real people with families are dying at the rate of about 100 a day, many of them double vaccinated.
How many of them could have been saved with the proper medical treatment?
You don't want to know do you?
I am not just talking about HCQ & Ivermectin, there are quite a few other including REGEN which is authorised for use here.
I wonder how many patients have actually been treated with it?
The only one we here about is DEXAMETHASONE, which is way less effective than many other medicines. |
What a hypocrite and shitehawk you are. Without vaccination that would be about 1000 a day. Your ‘therapies’ may or may not save a handful each day. Let me rephrase that, more may have died with HCQ.
Do you have any idea what Regen is? Do you understand it does the same things as a vaccine, but only really is effective in those without an antibody response.
Its licensing in the U.K. is as a treatment for those unable to mount an immune response.
And here come the bit that shows what a hypocrite you are. Bleat on about ‘big pharma’ and how your repurposed drugs are so cheap and effective
Well, Regen for 95% of people is less effective than vaccine protection, but costs somewhere between 50 to 100 times the cost of a full vaccine course. Also far more likely to lead to adverse reactions. But never mind eh?
Or is the truth you are worshiping at the altar of Trump, who was of course not yet vaccinated and treated with this. As was Abbot the Tx governor. Another idiot allowing disease to spread and not supporting vaccination. Is this your true colours shining though ? You truly are an idiot | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 17:30 - Sep 11 with 499 views | Dr_Winston |
| The kids are seeing sense on 12:50 - Sep 11 by A_Fans_Dad |
Perhaps you missed this sentence?
"The CDC [2,6] reported a 94-96% hospitalization rate for VAERS-identified myocarditis."
As I pointed out the COVID hospitalisations are not just for CAEs, they were just hospitalisations with and without comorbidities.
I don't see anywhere that they were for only CAEs.
To make a proper comparison you also need to know how many vaccinated 12-17 year olds suffered from
Aphasia
Encephalopathy
Dyspnoea
Paralysis
Kidney failure
Hypoxia
Guillain-Barre syndrome
Transverse myelitis
Blood clots
Tremors
Vision concerns
All of which have been reported on VAERs and can require hospitalisation as well. |
This is the kind of post that sets AfD apart from someone like Stumpy.
AfD has done his homework. He's researched and truly believes this nonsense, whilst Stumpy just says whatever he thinks will be the most provocative. |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| The kids are seeing sense on 17:32 - Sep 11 with 495 views | Professor |
| The kids are seeing sense on 17:30 - Sep 11 by Dr_Winston |
This is the kind of post that sets AfD apart from someone like Stumpy.
AfD has done his homework. He's researched and truly believes this nonsense, whilst Stumpy just says whatever he thinks will be the most provocative. |
Stump is just a WUM.
AFD needs help | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 18:32 - Sep 11 with 479 views | Jack123 |
| The kids are seeing sense on 17:30 - Sep 11 by Dr_Winston |
This is the kind of post that sets AfD apart from someone like Stumpy.
AfD has done his homework. He's researched and truly believes this nonsense, whilst Stumpy just says whatever he thinks will be the most provocative. |
Just a shame you can't disprove what afd says rather than calling it nonsense. I must say a very lazy post. |  |
| |
| The kids are seeing sense on 19:40 - Sep 11 with 461 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The kids are seeing sense on 17:30 - Sep 11 by Dr_Winston |
This is the kind of post that sets AfD apart from someone like Stumpy.
AfD has done his homework. He's researched and truly believes this nonsense, whilst Stumpy just says whatever he thinks will be the most provocative. |
For your information that data is not "nonsense", it is there for anybody to find if you wish to spend a little time.
It is from the VAERs system which stands for Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting.
Get it, official USA Government data.
If you want more information look at the equivelent EU system which has even more deaths and a lot more "serious adverse events" reported.
It is a shame to live in ignorance. | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 19:42 - Sep 11 with 460 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The kids are seeing sense on 17:29 - Sep 11 by Professor |
What a hypocrite and shitehawk you are. Without vaccination that would be about 1000 a day. Your ‘therapies’ may or may not save a handful each day. Let me rephrase that, more may have died with HCQ.
Do you have any idea what Regen is? Do you understand it does the same things as a vaccine, but only really is effective in those without an antibody response.
Its licensing in the U.K. is as a treatment for those unable to mount an immune response.
And here come the bit that shows what a hypocrite you are. Bleat on about ‘big pharma’ and how your repurposed drugs are so cheap and effective
Well, Regen for 95% of people is less effective than vaccine protection, but costs somewhere between 50 to 100 times the cost of a full vaccine course. Also far more likely to lead to adverse reactions. But never mind eh?
Or is the truth you are worshiping at the altar of Trump, who was of course not yet vaccinated and treated with this. As was Abbot the Tx governor. Another idiot allowing disease to spread and not supporting vaccination. Is this your true colours shining though ? You truly are an idiot |
So you still do not accept that combined medical approaches are better than a single Vaccines only approach?
OK. | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 19:47 - Sep 11 with 460 views | Scotia |
| The kids are seeing sense on 18:32 - Sep 11 by Jack123 |
Just a shame you can't disprove what afd says rather than calling it nonsense. I must say a very lazy post. |
What AFD says is disproven by someone though. Pretty much every time. | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 19:47 - Sep 11 with 459 views | Professor |
| The kids are seeing sense on 19:40 - Sep 11 by A_Fans_Dad |
For your information that data is not "nonsense", it is there for anybody to find if you wish to spend a little time.
It is from the VAERs system which stands for Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting.
Get it, official USA Government data.
If you want more information look at the equivelent EU system which has even more deaths and a lot more "serious adverse events" reported.
It is a shame to live in ignorance. |
Which has no verification of what is reported | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 19:52 - Sep 11 with 454 views | onehunglow |
| The kids are seeing sense on 19:42 - Sep 11 by A_Fans_Dad |
So you still do not accept that combined medical approaches are better than a single Vaccines only approach?
OK. |
OK.
SO we shouldn't take this vax
Do we take any vaccination
And this time,have the guts to answer the core question .
Vax or no vax unless... | |
| |
| The kids are seeing sense on 20:01 - Sep 11 with 452 views | Professor |
| The kids are seeing sense on 19:42 - Sep 11 by A_Fans_Dad |
So you still do not accept that combined medical approaches are better than a single Vaccines only approach?
OK. |
Of course it is. And that’s why a proper evidence base such as RECOVERY gives. Including showing efficacy for Regen in those not seroconverted. It may yet show Ivermectin works.
But equally it is important ineffective treatments or those which are detrimental (HCQ) are not used.
But prevention of disease through vaccination is pretty much universally better than relying on a therapy. It’s great Regen offers a solution for the immunocompromised. I hope we get specific anti-virals in the next year too. | | | |
| The kids are seeing sense on 21:03 - Sep 11 with 437 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The kids are seeing sense on 19:47 - Sep 11 by Professor |
Which has no verification of what is reported |
Just as there has been no verification on the data on other vaccines for the last 20 years which it is compared to.
I don't care if you and scotia do not accept the VAERs and EU data, there are many who do and work with the data, because it is what we have. [Post edited 12 Sep 2021 12:21]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
