NeuroTypical

President Nelson vaccinated

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Grunt said:

 There have been adverse reactions, including deaths, reported after receiving the vaccine.  Physicians have attributed some of those deaths to the reactions to the vaccines.

This makes no sense.

Only those with proof are adverse reactions, by definition of the term. The rest are adverse events.

And I know you might think it's all syntax, but understanding the difference is imperative to understanding what's happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Backroads said:

This makes no sense.

Only those with proof are adverse reactions, by definition of the term. The rest are adverse events.

And I know you might think it's all syntax, but understanding the difference is imperative to understanding what's happening.

Most adverse reactions start out as adverse events.   As I've posted numerous times, the Chief Physician of Norway agrees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Backroads said:

No.

The article reported correlation and has yet to demonstrate causation.

False.  The Chief Physician has stated otherwise, as I've posted.    

I can't combat your bias.  Enjoy the rest of your evening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Grunt said:
15 hours ago, dprh said:

In all the links shared on this thread, I don't see anything that states or shows that the vaccine caused a death.  That might be what some people take away from them, but I don't see it explicitly stated, or even really implied.

One last time.

Quote

In a worrying development, 23 elderly people died within a short time of receiving their first coronavirus vaccine shots in Norway. However, there is no confirmation yet if there is direct correlation between the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 jab and these deaths.

Although a direct correlation between the Pfizer jab and these deaths is yet to be established, experts have said that 13 out of 23 people who died showed common side effects of mRNA vaccines such as diarrhea, nausea and fever.

It's truly amazing.  You even quote it:  "However, there is no confirmation yet if there is direct correlation between the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 jab and these deaths."

Somehow, when you read a news article that says "there is no confirmation if there's a correlation between the vaccine and these deaths", you somehow morph that in your brain into "this article claims the vaccine caused these deaths".   And you cite the link, which says the exact opposite, as proof.  And then you do it again.  And then a third time. 

It's baffling, Grunt.  I know you're looking at my posts and asking "what's wrong with this guy?"  I have to admit, I'm doing the same with you.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/23/2021 at 1:22 AM, person0 said:

Not really.  There have been plenty of people who have had severe pains and symptoms after the shot so far.  If it is a pretty bad experience for some, as I have heard, I could certainly imagine it resulting in death among those who are older and more frail.  I'm sure President Nelson will be fine because, as far as I know, he doesn't have any underlying conditions, but he is very old.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-18/what-to-know-about-vaccine-related-deaths-allergies-quicktake

This article is the type of backwards talk that has been inconsistent since the beginning of Covid. In this article, it is interesting how they minimize the death correlated with the vaccine with "underlying conditions" but since last year they have been reporting "underlying conditions" and Covid as -- Covid is the worst virus ever. Imagine if they treated these death correlated with the vaccine as they have treated other deaths with underlying conditions? I mean, if the article (once read a while back) was correct they applied a Covid death of a man who was killed in a motorcycle accident.

Also, if you calculate 32 out of 42000 death that gives you 0.00076% chance of dying from the vaccine (correlation).

In Utah we have a population of 3.2 million, with about 1600 deaths total in roughly a year now. The total death percentage and likelihood of death from Covid is 0.0005%. That's not very comforting.

Let's say this remains static, and everyone in the world decided to give in and obtain the vaccine. This potential deaths would lead us to 5,600,000 deaths correlated with the vaccine. More than what has died in the first year from Covid. Just using the same principle that started with Covid in the beginning of this pandemic. At first I heard it had a 10% death rate. If 100 people were found with Covid 10 would die. Then my brother was all about all the research and family texts of 4-5% (fear, run, scare). Now, with actual statistics it is much, much lower. Should we treat these correlated deaths with the vaccine as they treated Covid correlated deaths in the beginning?

This is why I place very little trust in the arm of flesh. Underlying conditions were seen as Covid deaths (all last year), but now with the vaccine they are giving excuses it isn't the vaccine, they had underlying conditions. It would be nice if things were simply reported accurately, rather than spewing the fear one way, while denying it the other way.

Edited by Anddenex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now here is some breaking news.  Not a lot of media coverage yet, I expect we'll all be able to google it by end of day.

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/the-moderna-covid-19-mrna-1273-vaccine-what-you-need-to-know

Quote

Who should not take the vaccine?

While pregnancy puts women at a higher risk of severe COVID-19, the use of this vaccine in pregnant women is currently not recommended, unless they are at risk of high exposure (e.g. health workers).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

It's truly amazing.  You even quote it:  "However, there is no confirmation yet if there is direct correlation between the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 jab and these deaths."

Somehow, when you read a news article that says "there is no confirmation if there's a correlation between the vaccine and these deaths", you somehow morph that in your brain into "this article claims the vaccine caused these deaths".   And you cite the link, which says the exact opposite, as proof.  And then you do it again.  And then a third time. 

It's baffling, Grunt.  I know you're looking at my posts and asking "what's wrong with this guy?"  I have to admit, I'm doing the same with you.  

 

To be fair, I said I didn't see where it was implied.  His article definitely implies the vaccine pushed some high-risk people over the edge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Anddenex said:

This article is the type of backwards talk that has been inconsistent since the beginning of Covid. In this article, it is interesting how they minimize the death correlated with the vaccine with "underlying conditions" but since last year they have been reporting "underlying conditions" and Covid as -- Covid is the worst virus ever. Imagine if they treated these death correlated with the vaccine as they have treated other deaths with underlying conditions? I mean, if the article (once read a while back) was correct they applied a Covid death of a man who was killed in a motorcycle accident.

Also, if you calculate 32 out of 42000 death that gives you 0.00076% chance of dying from the vaccine (correlation).

In Utah we have a population of 3.2 million, with about 1600 deaths total in roughly a year now. The total death percentage and likelihood of death from Covid is 0.0005%. That's not very comforting.

Let's say this remains static, and everyone in the world decided to give in and obtain the vaccine. This potential deaths would lead us to 5,600,000 deaths correlated with the vaccine. More than what has died in the first year from Covid. Just using the same principle that started with Covid in the beginning of this pandemic. At first I heard it had a 10% death rate. If 100 people were found with Covid 10 would die. Then my brother was all about all the research and family texts of 4-5% (fear, run, scare). Now, with actual statistics it is much, much lower. Should we treat these correlated deaths with the vaccine as they treated Covid correlated deaths in the beginning?

This is why I place very little trust in the arm of flesh. Underlying conditions were seen as Covid deaths (all last year), but now with the vaccine they are giving excuses it isn't the vaccine, they had underlying conditions. It would be nice if things were simply reported accurately, rather than spewing the fear one way, while denying it the other way.

While there may be a risk of death from COVID, we should have correct numbers.  There have currently been around 71.3 million shots given thus far.  35 deaths out of 71.3 million is actually something like .000000043 of a percent (I maybe off 10th or 100th of a percentage there, math has never been my strong point).  Basically it's about 1/2 out of a million, or a one in 2 million chance (and that is attributing ALL of the deaths to the vaccine instead of other things).

There have been 339,000 cases of Covid registered in Utah as of my typing of this according to Google.  There have been 1614 deaths (and that is considered to be undercounted by around 35-60% in Utah at least...).  Now, there have probably been more cases of  COVID in Utah than that, but as we do not know as they are not verified...taking into account those numbers we do have...is around a .0048 (rounded up to the nearest 10,000th).

Even being bad at math I can see there have been more deaths in Utah from COVID-19 with fewer cases, than deaths from the number of shots of the vaccine comparatively (32 compared to 1614).

Though I admit there are concerns, I'm not certain I agree with your numbers.  I am not a mathematician by any means, but I don't think the numbers are currently saying there is a greater risk to your life.

Your own statement is that you have 3.2 Million people in Utah.  That would be more like 1.4 - 1.6 deaths from the Vaccine (if we say the deaths are directly attributable to the Vaccine) from what I see the numbers standing right now (and to be safe, we can even round that up to 2 deaths, for the benefit of the doubt as now on suffers from a .4 death).  That SEEMS to be a LOT LESS than 1614.  At least from a quick glance on my part at the numbers.

Edited by JohnsonJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

While there may be a risk of death from COVID, we should have correct numbers.  There have currently been around 71.3 million shots given thus far.  35 deaths out of 71.3 million is actually something like .000000043 of a percent (I maybe off 10th or 100th of a percentage there, math has never been my strong point).  Basically it's about 1/2 out of a million, or a one in 2 million chance (and that is attributing ALL of the deaths to the vaccine instead of other things).

There have been 339,000 cases of Covid registered in Utah as of my typing of this according to Google.  There have been 1614 deaths (and that is considered to be undercounted by around 35-60% in Utah at least...).  Now, there have probably been more cases of  COVID in Utah than that, but as we do not know as they are not verified...taking into account those numbers we do have...is around a .0048 (rounded up to the nearest 10,000th).

Even being bad at math I can see there have been more deaths in Utah from COVID-19 with fewer cases, than deaths from the number of shots of the vaccine comparatively (32 compared to 1614).

Though I admit there are concerns, I'm not certain I agree with your numbers.  I am not a mathematician by any means, but I don't think the numbers are currently saying there is a greater risk to your life.

Your own statement is that you have 3.2 Million people in Utah.  That would be more like 1.4 - 1.6 deaths from the Vaccine (if we say the deaths are directly attributable to the Vaccine) from what I see the numbers standing right now (and to be safe, we can even round that up to 2 deaths, for the benefit of the doubt as now on suffers from a .4 death).  That SEEMS to be a LOT LESS than 1614.  At least from a quick glance on my part at the numbers.

I think it was pretty obvious the numbers I was using with regards to the article, which showcased 42,000 vaccinations given in that region with 32 deaths. As with any statistic it all depends on the numbers used. I'm no mathematician either, but I'm sure if you take the percentage of the numbers from the article (given again for your benefit) I think you will come up with the same percentage from that "pool" of people.

Also notice the general statement -- "Let's say this remains static..." Using, once again, the pool of 32 out of 42,000, which again should have been obvious. I understood there have been more vaccines. Where did you get your number of 35 deaths? I hope you weren't using 35 for 32 for your 71.3 million statistic. Remember that 32 given was from that report of 42,000 vaccines. Surely, since you gave that number 35 you can show the report that specifies 35 deaths out of 71.3 M vaccinations for your math?

EDIT: and my numbers are off by one it was 33 not 32 out of 42,000.

I'm pretty sure Covid and the vaccine have about the same risk to my life, so not to worried either way. And the point of my message above wasn't the statistic, which obviously was using a pool of people from the article with a higher death possibility than the one you have given. It was this:

"This is why I place very little trust in the arm of flesh. Underlying conditions were seen as Covid deaths (all last year), but now with the vaccine they are giving excuses it isn't the vaccine, they had underlying conditions. It would be nice if things were simply reported accurately, rather than spewing the fear one way, while denying it the other way."

Edited by Anddenex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Anddenex said:

 

I'm pretty sure Covid and the vaccine have about the same risk to my life, so not to worried either way. And the point of my message above wasn't the statistic, which obviously was using a pool of people from the article with a higher death possibility than the one you have given. It was this:

"This is why I place very little trust in the arm of flesh. Underlying conditions were seen as Covid deaths (all last year), but now with the vaccine they are giving excuses it isn't the vaccine, they had underlying conditions. It would be nice if things were simply reported accurately, rather than spewing the fear one way, while denying it the other way."

 

And that's the issue, really.  Norway, as I pointed out, suggested the risk of the vaccine isn't worth the supposed benefit.   It really depends on your age, condition, and potential reactions to mRNA vaccines.  The groups that appear to have less concern from catching the virus also have less concern from the vaccine.  The inverse is also true.  

Your closing statement is one of the biggest issues I have with this.  Data is hard to find and information that doesn't fit the message is spun or suppressed.  People refuse to be objective, as we've seen in this thread, even.  

Fortunately, the DOD isn't making this mandatory.  I've opted to pass thus far.  There are just too many variables.  How often will I have to get the vaccine?  How long does it last?  Is it protection from all strains?  Can I stop wearing the mask since I'm immune?   Can I stop social distancing since I'm immune?  Am I even immune?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I am optimistic about the future. It will be filled with opportunities for each of us to progress, contribute, and take the gospel to every corner of the earth. But I am also not naïve about the days ahead. We live in a world that is complex and increasingly contentious. The constant availability of social media and a 24-hour news cycle bombard us with relentless messages. If we are to have any hope of sifting through the myriad of voices and the philosophies of men that attack truth, we must learn to receive revelation.

Our Savior and Redeemer, Jesus Christ, will perform some of His mightiest works between now and when He comes again. We will see miraculous indications that God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, preside over this Church in majesty and glory. But in coming days, it will not be possible to survive spiritually without the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost."

Russell M. Nelson, April 2018 General Conference

 

This was given almost 3 years ago. The days are no longer coming...they are here now. No more arguing please. The Holy Ghost will tell you the proper course of action you and your families are to take, and, (for reasons known to the Lord) that direction may not always perfectly align with direction given to another. Don't worry about the actions of others. Do not gauge what you are doing to be right or wrong based off of what others do. Trust in what the spirit whispers, and follow the Lord's judgement and timing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Anddenex said:

I think it was pretty obvious the numbers I was using with regards to the article, which showcased 42,000 vaccinations given in that region with 32 deaths. As with any statistic it all depends on the numbers used. I'm no mathematician either, but I'm sure if you take the percentage of the numbers from the article (given again for your benefit) I think you will come up with the same percentage from that "pool" of people.

Also notice the general statement -- "Let's say this remains static..." Using, once again, the pool of 32 out of 42,000, which again should have been obvious. I understood there have been more vaccines. Where did you get your number of 35 deaths? I hope you weren't using 35 for 32 for your 71.3 million statistic. Remember that 32 given was from that report of 42,000 vaccines. Surely, since you gave that number 35 you can show the report that specifies 35 deaths out of 71.3 M vaccinations for your math?

EDIT: and my numbers are off by one it was 33 not 32 out of 42,000.

I'm pretty sure Covid and the vaccine have about the same risk to my life, so not to worried either way. And the point of my message above wasn't the statistic, which obviously was using a pool of people from the article with a higher death possibility than the one you have given. It was this:

"This is why I place very little trust in the arm of flesh. Underlying conditions were seen as Covid deaths (all last year), but now with the vaccine they are giving excuses it isn't the vaccine, they had underlying conditions. It would be nice if things were simply reported accurately, rather than spewing the fear one way, while denying it the other way."

Yes, I googled Vaccine deaths and how many Vaccines had been administered.  It gave me the same 32/33 you quote, but I also noted that there had been at least one case more noted in the news just yesterday, and another that I had not heard mentioned much bringing it up to at least 35, IF we counted them all as deaths.  The number of vaccines administered is easily looked up in Google, and as we were using international numbers for deaths, I figured we should use international numbers for the number of vaccines adminstered as well (today it is listed as 82.5 million shots given, though the US has a mere 10.6 million vaccinated (which differs alarmingly from another number google has which says 25.6 million doses administered).

For a non-google link you can look here (one of the first results off of Google).

Bloomberg covid Vaccine tracker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Grunt said:

And that's the issue, really.  Norway, as I pointed out, suggested the risk of the vaccine isn't worth the supposed benefit.   It really depends on your age, condition, and potential reactions to mRNA vaccines.  The groups that appear to have less concern from catching the virus also have less concern from the vaccine.  The inverse is also true.  

Your closing statement is one of the biggest issues I have with this.  Data is hard to find and information that doesn't fit the message is spun or suppressed.  People refuse to be objective, as we've seen in this thread, even.  

Fortunately, the DOD isn't making this mandatory.  I've opted to pass thus far.  There are just too many variables.  How often will I have to get the vaccine?  How long does it last?  Is it protection from all strains?  Can I stop wearing the mask since I'm immune?   Can I stop social distancing since I'm immune?  Am I even immune?  

Oh wow...that's different.  When I was in (it WAS MANY MANY MANY years ago) we didn't get a choice about shots.  We were given them whether we wanted them or not (well, technically I suppose someone could refuse, that would be a one way choice to prison though).

It may turn out that this is a choice as long as the amount of vaccine is limited.  Most people in the military probably are healthier in general and at a lower risk (or so I imagine) than some of the other groups out there.  It would make more sense to allow the vaccine to be administered among high risk groups first.

You ask some good questions, most of which I do not have the answers for.  I don't think they absolutely know how long the immunity will last from it, or whether it will provide protection for ALL of the various strains that may come out.  The advise I've seen is that it doesn't stop Covid-19 from infecting you, but prevents it from triggering the immune response and inflammation that will cause harm or kill you, thus you can still spread it to others.   That means at least for right now, social distancing would still be a thing to adhere to.

These are valid concerns, and if you have the freedom to make the choice currently, good on you for utilizing the freedom granted to you.  I don't know if anyone has the full answers to the questions you pose yet.

I do want to get vaccinated, but am slightly more picky of the vaccine I'd like to get vaccinated with, and hope that we could get a choice of which one.

If I get vaccinated I WANT the moderna vaccine as they think that will give immunity to all the versions out currently, and will last at least for a year (some have hypothesized up to 10 years of immunity from it).  Johnson and Johnson's version which is coming out I fear will give less immunity and may require more frequent boosters...something I could definitely do without.  I don't understand why it is that someone at my age is not getting the vaccine (I would like it) but they are already vaccinating those who are in their twenties and thirties and such for being in the second wave of vaccinations.  Some have said I have to make an appointment but someone forget to tell a lot of us just how we are supposed to do that.  I know several of my co-workers (other professors and such) are telling me that they are now able to get vaccinated, but none of them have told me where these vaccinations are being offered to them at.  I haven't seen anyone on campus advertising it being given out on campus yet, so I imagine it's not via the university that it is being offered to them, but somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JohnsonJones said:

Oh wow...that's different.  When I was in (it WAS MANY MANY MANY years ago) we didn't get a choice about shots.  We were given them whether we wanted them or not (well, technically I suppose someone could refuse, that would be a one way choice to prison though).

 

It's only with this vaccine.   The others are mandatory unless you can get an exemption.  I don't think it's as much due to the availability as much as it is the vaccine itself.  They allot enough doses for my unit and when people opt out they move them back into the supply.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, scottyg said:

"I am optimistic about the future. It will be filled with opportunities for each of us to progress, contribute, and take the gospel to every corner of the earth. But I am also not naïve about the days ahead. We live in a world that is complex and increasingly contentious. The constant availability of social media and a 24-hour news cycle bombard us with relentless messages. If we are to have any hope of sifting through the myriad of voices and the philosophies of men that attack truth, we must learn to receive revelation.

Our Savior and Redeemer, Jesus Christ, will perform some of His mightiest works between now and when He comes again. We will see miraculous indications that God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, preside over this Church in majesty and glory. But in coming days, it will not be possible to survive spiritually without the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost."

Russell M. Nelson, April 2018 General Conference

 

This was given almost 3 years ago. The days are no longer coming...they are here now. No more arguing please. The Holy Ghost will tell you the proper course of action you and your families are to take, and, (for reasons known to the Lord) that direction may not always perfectly align with direction given to another. Don't worry about the actions of others. Do not gauge what you are doing to be right or wrong based off of what others do. Trust in what the spirit whispers, and follow the Lord's judgement and timing.

Very good advice.   Add to it these verses, and we're good:

"Behold, you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me. But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right,"

"And as all have not faith, seek ye diligently and teach one another words of wisdom; yea, seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom, seek learning even by study and also by faith;"

And finally, serpents don't seek the influence of the Holy Ghost.  And yet: "Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves."

God gave us both the Holy Spirit, and also brains.  They work best in tandem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Yes, I googled Vaccine deaths and how many Vaccines had been administered.  It gave me the same 32/33 you quote, but I also noted that there had been at least one case more noted in the news just yesterday, and another that I had not heard mentioned much bringing it up to at least 35, IF we counted them all as deaths.  The number of vaccines administered is easily looked up in Google, and as we were using international numbers for deaths, I figured we should use international numbers for the number of vaccines adminstered as well (today it is listed as 82.5 million shots given, though the US has a mere 10.6 million vaccinated (which differs alarmingly from another number google has which says 25.6 million doses administered).

For a non-google link you can look here (one of the first results off of Google).

Bloomberg covid Vaccine tracker

That seems odd. This would mean Norway has had a disturbing number of deaths for countries affected adversely by the vaccine (with underlying conditions). I doubt that to be the case. If that is the case, then Norway should reconsider the vaccine as they, according to your search, have 33 of the 35 deaths. That is alarming.

Edited by Anddenex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Anddenex said:

That seems odd. This would mean Norway has had a disturbing number of deaths for countries affected adversely by the vaccine (with underlying conditions). I doubt that to be the case. If that is the case, then Norway should reconsider the vaccine as they, according to your search, have 33 of the 35 deaths. That is alarming.

Well, perhaps other nations were not administering the vaccine to those who were on their deathbeds, or were extremely old with critical underlying conditions.  Norway has noted that those who died had some conditions which were killing the individuals already making it a question of whether it was the vaccine, or that they died of the other conditions that were already killing them.  However, out of an abundance of caution...they have now issued the following in the past day.

Quote

But with the Corona vaccines now issue a message Norway for uncertainty. The Norwegian Health authority warns, according to the news agency Bloomberg namely that the Covid-19 vaccines could be risky for the very old and seriously ill. This is after BloombergAssessment to be the most cautious statement to date by a European health authority after the countries started the Side effects to evaluate the corona vaccines in real use.

For this reason, the guidelines for vaccination this group of people – very old and seriously ill people – against Covid-19 changed. Specifically, it is about the side effects of the mRNA vaccines from Biontech / Pfizer * (Corminaty vaccine) and from Covid-19 Vaccine from Moderna that have so far been approved in the EU. For younger and fitter people they would Side effects mostly pose no danger, said Steinar Madsen, medical director of the Norwegian Health Authority, according to the Medical journal.

--------------------------------------

The background to the warning is an evaluation of the Deaths in Norway. According to the Norwegian authorities, 23 seniors are about to receive their first Vaccination dose died. But they were all over 75 and had serious underlying illnesses. In 13 deaths one autopsy carried out.

More on it where they still advise that the vaccine be taken.  The link is

deaths after corona vaccination norway issues a blatant warning

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Well, perhaps other nations were not administering the vaccine to those who were on their deathbeds, or were extremely old with critical underlying conditions.  Norway has noted that those who died had some conditions which were killing the individuals already making it a question of whether it was the vaccine, or that they died of the other conditions that were already killing them.  However, out of an abundance of caution...they have now issued the following in the past day.

More on it where they still advise that the vaccine be taken.  The link is

deaths after corona vaccination norway issues a blatant warning

Well, yes, that was what I mentioned in my very first response -- underlying conditions -- and in each response afterwards. How many people are counted with Covid who had underlying conditions -- as you say -- on their deathbeds, or were extremely old with critical underlying conditions. If you are going to count underlying conditions with Covid deaths, surely one should do the same thing with vaccinations if they are to remain consistent, honest, and with integrity. It is intellectually dishonest to discount/excuse "underlying conditions" with vaccines, while spreading fear with underlying conditions for Covid deaths.

The link you provided is for Norway that correlates with the link that has already been provided. You still didn't provide the report -- link -- of 35 deaths total for 73.1 million vaccinations. The link previously provided doesn't provide people who had been adversely affected. At least from me typing in deaths, or reviewing the article. It just gives the amount and when the next are coming.

It appears the vaccine seems to follow the virus itself. People over 75 are high risk, especially if you have underlying conditions. The majority of Covid deaths are people over 75 who were in long-term care facilities. Not only that they counted a man who died in a motor-cycle accident as a Covid death, but this article did mention they actually took the time to remove it. I wonder if they removed it because of the heat, rather than being intellectually honest. Sadly, I believe the former is probably more accurate.

 

Edited by Anddenex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Things take time. 

For the record, I am still planning on getting the vaccine.  Supposedly around 20% of the people my age in the area  have already been vaccinated.  I think part of the problem people my age are having is everything is supposed to be online for sign ups and it is terribly confusing.

That's not why I'm posting in the thread though.  There is an update to some of the worries that people have noted here, and there is a risk.  It has been shown that there were cases of death when the vaccine was administered and it appears to have caused some of those deaths.

This is the link to a copy of the research (I think this is from a site that allows free downloads, I have access via the university system to sites with research that are not open to non-payers so sometimes finding a source which has it for free can be difficult, but I think this is a site at least allows limited free access occasionally).

Reports of Anaphylaxis After Receipt of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines in the US—December 14, 2020-January 18, 2021

It seems that the vaccine shot can lead to anaphylaxis shock in some individuals, after around 17.5 million shots being administered that there were around 66 cases of this.

There also seems to be a trend between those who have had anaphylaxis previously (it looks to be around 16 individuals who previously suffered from it suffered from it again with the shot).  Women are slightly more subject to this then men.

The numbers seem to pan out that you have a .00005% chance of having this occur from the results thus far, which seems to me to be a safe range which is why I am still planning on taking the vaccine.  However, it is noted that prior concerns about the vaccine having some negative affects on people could occur, and I thought I'd post the paper that supports those who feel this way.

That said, I still feel the results indicate that my chances are better getting the vaccine than not...but that's my personal stance right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other news, I got a shingles shot and flu shot last week.  That night, I got the chills.  And the next day, I had the sweats.   Normal mild reactions to a vaccine.

Since I'm part of a phase 3 research program, I have to report all changes in my health periodically.  I notified the app last week, and I'll notify the clinic gathering the research in the next week or two when they call me for the routine questions.   And since there are tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of us in various studies, reporting data across the country, I'm sure my story is hardly unique.  Our data will be entered in various databases, probably into the VAERS database too. 

Where people who lack some critical understandings of how things work, will be able to look through VAERS and claim "People who get the COVID vaccine, can get spontaneous chills and sweats 6 months after their injection!"  (See, I got the COVID shot in August, and now it's Feb, so that's around 6 months.)

Because they don't understand how things work.  That's why they'll be able to make a claim like that.  They will go to VAERS, filter on people who have been vaccinated for COVID, and note the symptoms and timeframe.  And because they're ignorant in some basic understanding on how the data works, they'll assume my chills and sweats from the shingles shot, actually came from my COVID shot.   They will be wrong, but there you go.

Edited by NeuroTypical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Missionaries are now being "encouraged" to receive the COVID vaccine.

I just received an email from my daughter's mission president.  He met with several other mission presidents to discuss informing parents about it.  I'm not sure why.  They are adults after all.  Maybe just a courtesy since they are not asking for permission, just informing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Missionaries are now being "encouraged" to receive the COVID vaccine.

I just received an email from my daughter's mission president.  He met with several other mission presidents to discuss informing parents about it.  I'm not sure why.  They are adults after all.  Maybe just a courtesy since they are not asking for permission, just informing.

That makes sense-- both encouraging the missionaries and informing parents.  Yes, missionaries are adults, but at 18 a lot of the time that line gets blurred.  And it's easier for a mission president to inform parents of missionary field operations and be open about that information, rather than leaving it on the missionaries shoulders to inform each parent what's going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good - get 'em the shots, and get 'em off of facebook and back into face to face interactions with people!

I'm pretty enthusiastic about the vaccine's ability to move the covid needle more towards normal times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now