The science says

[LetsGoBrandon]

Well frankly..I think your "mutilating children shtick is probably bs.."

Yes, Doctors Are Performing Sex Change Surgeries On Kids

Several media outlets have downplayed the prevalence of transgender surgeries for minors, but documents reveal these surgeries are being performed on children.

dailycaller.com

However..most recently your claim that " any doctor that recommends a booster instead of waiting for variant specific boosters is a quack"..
Came from somewhere..

My opinion. In the lead up to the Bivalent version, one would have to be a quack to give the original version of the vaccine with the omicron specific variant at the time just weeks away.

 

[jaeger19]

Yes, Doctors Are Performing Sex Change Surgeries On Kids

Several media outlets have downplayed the prevalence of transgender surgeries for minors, but documents reveal these surgeries are being performed on children.

dailycaller.com

My opinion. In the lead up to the Bivalent version, one would have to be a quack to give the original version of the vaccine with the omicron specific variant at the time just weeks away.

Yes. Your opinion which is not medically sound.

As far as maatectomies on 15 year olds?
So?. If it's medically necessary and in compliance with strict medical board criteria as I would believe Boston would adhere to..what's the issue.?
Or would you rather have a 15 year old commit suicide because they are completely distressed by their body.?
Have you ever spoken to the parents of transgender children? I have
Have you ever treated them? I have.
You realize that for a 15 year old to have a mastectomy..strict guidelines must be followed and parental and patient consent given to ensure that the surgery is medically necessary for the person in question..
You get that right?

 

[JasperL]

I SAID covid is NOT potentially fatal unless you are very old or have diabetes!

Why do you say things like that? It's simply not true.

Or, if you believe it's true, you need to show the DATA that indicate the risk is limited to this relatively narrow group of people. You won't do that because it's made up.

 

[JasperL]

"The vaccine efficacy estimate, based on a total of 95 adjudicated cases"

That's the preliminary findings. They updated them. It's in the paper. From the summary:

Symptomatic Covid-19 illness was confirmed in 185 participants in the placebo group (56.5 per 1000 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 48.7 to 65.3) and in 11 participants in the mRNA-1273 group (3.3 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 1.7 to 6.0); vaccine efficacy was 94.1% (95% CI, 89.3 to 96.8%; P<0.001). Efficacy was similar across key secondary analyses, including assessment 14 days after the first dose, analyses that included participants who had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at baseline, and analyses in participants 65 years of age or older. Severe Covid-19 occurred in 30 participants, with one fatality; all 30 were in the placebo group.

Note that they did a "special" count of 'severe' cases.

People like you were fooled into thinking the initial research had an enormous N. Only a small number of subjects got covid. All symptomatic covid was counted equally, no special counts for severe disease. And after that there were no more control groups.

Medical research is never supposed to be done that way -- one small short term small N study. It is ALWAYS expected to be replicated.
The vaccinated group and the placebo group were each about 15,000 participants, so 30,000 in the study. That's not a "small n" study.

And of course this wasn't "medical research" in the traditional sense. At the time they are racing to get a vaccine through the 1) safety, then 2) efficacy testing so that they didn't exactly have time to sit on their asses and wait for a couple thousand infections, as another few 100 thousand people died, and many more admitted to ICUs, waiting on the vaccine. They did the minimum needed for reasonable assurance the vaccine did WORK, and was safe. And of course it did work.

 

[JasperL]

As stated in the article, the power in this experiment depends on the number of cases, NOT the number of subjects.

An experiment can have one subject, yet the N could be 100. It depends on the experiment and how it is analyzed.

They needed a large number of subjects for this research, in order to get enough cases within a short time.

There is a link in the article to the statistics, but it doesn't work. That would have provided information about the analysis and what tests were done, and exactly what the N is.

As I said before, if there had been a million subjects, but the same number of cases, the power would NOT have increased. Just think about that.

 

[JasperL]

No, half the American population was not at risk of dying from covid. Maybe half are overweight, but half are NOT obese.

risk factors 'like' obesity. Obesity estimates depend on the data source but are something like 30-40%. NHANES estimates it at 42% nationwide.

But that's just one risk factor that really just predicts other risk factors. I'm fairly certain if you take all the risk factors, such as age, high blood pressure, metabolic disease, various lung diseases, liver, kidney, heart disease, etc. that you're well over half the u.s adult population.

 

[Good4Nothin]

In the non-elderly population the “number needed to treat” to prevent a single death runs into the thousands. Re-analysis of randomised controlled trials using the messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) technology suggests a greater risk of serious adverse events from the vaccines than being hospitalised from COVID-19. Pharmacovigilance systems and real-world safety data, coupled with plausible mechanisms of harm, are deeply concerning, especially in relation to cardiovascular safety. Mirroring a potential signal from the Pfizer Phase 3 trial, a significant rise in cardiac arrest calls to ambulances in England was seen in 2021, with similar data emerging from Israel in the 16–39-year-old age group.

Curing the pandemic of misinformation on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines through real evidence-based medicine - Part 1 | Malhotra | Journal of Metabolic Health

The Journal of Metabolic Health is a peer-reviewed, clinically oriented open access journal covering advances in metabolic health and related disorders. The journal focuses on pathophysiology, prevention, management, and advancing therapy for different patient populations with metabolic health...

insulinresistance.org

 

[Fledermaus]

Curing the pandemic of misinformation on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines through real evidence-based medicine - Part 1 | Malhotra | Journal of Metabolic Health

The Journal of Metabolic Health is a peer-reviewed, clinically oriented open access journal covering advances in metabolic health and related disorders. The journal focuses on pathophysiology, prevention, management, and advancing therapy for different patient populations with metabolic health...

insulinresistance.org

I always go to an insulin related site for COVID information.

 

[Good4Nothin]

I always go to an insulin related site for COVID information.

Of course, better to follow Biden's advice.

 

[Fledermaus]

Of course, better to follow Biden's advice.

First I follow my doctor's advise. Then the CDC's. I don't depend on politicians to tell me medical advice.

 

[Good4Nothin]

First I follow my doctor's advise. Then the CDC's. I don't depend on politicians to tell me medical advice.

So your doctor is a world expert on vaccines?

 

[Ethel2]

risk factors 'like' obesity. Obesity estimates depend on the data source but are something like 30-40%. NHANES estimates it at 42% nationwide.

But that's just one risk factor that really just predicts other risk factors. I'm fairly certain if you take all the risk factors, such as age, high blood pressure, metabolic disease, various lung diseases, liver, kidney, heart disease, etc. that you're well over half the u.s adult population.

I think its much higher than "well over half":

Overweight: 42.4%
Asthma: 8.3%
Diabetes: 10.5%

This doesn't even include people with cancer, autoimmune diseases, or just old age.

That said, omicron is not like delta or the other variants. If you are reasonably healthy its a glorified cold. People are not getting hospitalized much at all, and very few are dying. In my county of 260,000 as of today we have two people in the hospital FOR covid. No one has been in the ICU for months. I had covid a few weeks ago (and it ruined my scuba diving trip, dammit!). For me it was like any other cold I have had. My three dive buddies had similar clinical courses. No fever, no shortness of breath. I know that a series of four does not a study make, but I did talk to my own doc while I was in Mexico and he said basically what I wrote here. Its a like a cold. I think we are way overreacting to this variant. Personally, I think it should be treated like a cold-grab a box of tissues and get on with your life. Use common sense; do not cough on people; if you are around immunocompromised people wear a mask. One other thing my doc told me: he is not a big fan of Paxlovid for this variant. The purpose of Paxlovid is to keep people out of the hospital-but virtually no one is getting hospitalized anyway. Also, rebound positive tests, he said, are much more common than they are letting on.

 

[Good4Nothin]

I think its much higher than "well over half":

Overweight: 42.4%
Asthma: 8.3%
Diabetes: 10.5%

This doesn't even include people with cancer, autoimmune diseases, or just old age.

That said, omicron is not like delta or the other variants. If you are reasonably healthy its a glorified cold. People are not getting hospitalized much at all, and very few are dying. In my county of 260,000 as of today we have two people in the hospital FOR covid. No one has been in the ICU for months. I had covid a few weeks ago (and it ruined my scuba diving trip, dammit!). For me it was like any other cold I have had. My three dive buddies had similar clinical courses. No fever, no shortness of breath. I know that a series of four does not a study make, but I did talk to my own doc while I was in Mexico and he said basically what I wrote here. Its a like a cold. I think we are way overreacting to this variant. Personally, I think it should be treated like a cold-grab a box of tissues and get on with your life. Use common sense; do not cough on people; if you are around immunocompromised people wear a mask. One other thing my doc told me: he is not a big fan of Paxlovid for this variant. The purpose of Paxlovid is to keep people out of the hospital-but virtually no one is getting hospitalized anyway. Also, rebound positive tests, he said, are much more common than they are letting on.

Yes, that is true omicron is basically a cold. So why are some people still afraid of it, and why are mRNA boosters still being pushed?

As the article I linked states, the risk of vaccine side effects is worse than a covid infection, for the non-elderly.

 

[Fledermaus]

So your doctor is a world expert on vaccines?

What a stupid question.

A really, REALLY stupid question.

I will tell you they know who to get the information from.

Unlike you.

And guess who is a recognized world expert.

 

[jaeger19]

Yes, that is true omicron is basically a cold. So why are some people still afraid of it, and why are mRNA boosters still being pushed?

As the article I linked states, the risk of vaccine side effects is worse than a covid infection, for the non-elderly.

this is why:

"With the Omicron variant now accounting for almost 100% of COVID-19 cases in the United States, the seven-day average of daily COVID-related deaths hit 2,600 recently, the highest rate in about a year,The Washington Post reported.

That’s higher than the approximately 2,000 daily deaths last autumn during the Delta surge, but less than the 3,000 daily deaths last January, when COVID vaccines were not widely available, The Post data analysis said.

The Omicron variant generally causes less severe disease than other strains of COVID, but because it is so transmissible, Omicron is infecting higher raw numbers of people that previous strains."

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220209/omicron-death-rate-higher-than-during-delta-surge

The risk of the side effects of the vaccine is not worth the risk of potentially infecting the elderly or immunocompromised and causing them to die..

More:

"But in Massachusetts, omicron had a much deadlier impact than delta — and in a shorter period of time. That's according to research published Friday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

The findings illustrate that a highly contagious virus — even if it tends to cause milder illness — can still confer a substantial amount of death, said the study's lead author, Dr. Jeremy Faust, an emergency physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston."

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/omicron-caused-deaths-delta-northeastern-states-rcna29394

 

[Good4Nothin]

In the non-elderly population the “number needed to treat” to prevent a single death runs into the thousands. Re-analysis of randomised controlled trials using the messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) technology suggests a greater risk of serious adverse events from the vaccines than being hospitalised from COVID-19. Pharmacovigilance systems and real-world safety data, coupled with plausible mechanisms of harm, are deeply concerning, especially in relation to cardiovascular safety. Mirroring a potential signal from the Pfizer Phase 3 trial, a significant rise in cardiac arrest calls to ambulances in England was seen in 2021, with similar data emerging from Israel in the 16–39-year-old age group.

Curing the pandemic of misinformation on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines through real evidence-based medicine - Part 1 | Malhotra | Journal of Insulin Resistance​

The Journal of Insulin Resistance is a peer-reviewed, clinically oriented journal covering advances in disorders of insulin resistance. Articles focus on clinical care and advancing therapy for patients with insulin resistance-related disorders. Insulin resistance includes pathophysiology...

insulinresistance.org

 

[Good4Nothin]

this is why:

"With the Omicron variant now accounting for almost 100% of COVID-19 cases in the United States, the seven-day average of daily COVID-related deaths hit 2,600 recently, the highest rate in about a year,The Washington Post reported.

That’s higher than the approximately 2,000 daily deaths last autumn during the Delta surge, but less than the 3,000 daily deaths last January, when COVID vaccines were not widely available, The Post data analysis said.

The Omicron variant generally causes less severe disease than other strains of COVID, but because it is so transmissible, Omicron is infecting higher raw numbers of people that previous strains."

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220209/omicron-death-rate-higher-than-during-delta-surge

The risk of the side effects of the vaccine is not worth the risk of potentially infecting the elderly or immunocompromised and causing them to die..

More:

"But in Massachusetts, omicron had a much deadlier impact than delta — and in a shorter period of time. That's according to research published Friday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

The findings illustrate that a highly contagious virus — even if it tends to cause milder illness — can still confer a substantial amount of death, said the study's lead author, Dr. Jeremy Faust, an emergency physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston."

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/omicron-caused-deaths-delta-northeastern-states-rcna29394

Even Ethel2 said omicron is basically a cold.

 

[Ethel2]

this is why:

"With the Omicron variant now accounting for almost 100% of COVID-19 cases in the United States, the seven-day average of daily COVID-related deaths hit 2,600 recently, the highest rate in about a year,The Washington Post reported.

That’s higher than the approximately 2,000 daily deaths last autumn during the Delta surge, but less than the 3,000 daily deaths last January, when COVID vaccines were not widely available, The Post data analysis said.

The Omicron variant generally causes less severe disease than other strains of COVID, but because it is so transmissible, Omicron is infecting higher raw numbers of people that previous strains."

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220209/omicron-death-rate-higher-than-during-delta-surge

The risk of the side effects of the vaccine is not worth the risk of potentially infecting the elderly or immunocompromised and causing them to die..

More:

"But in Massachusetts, omicron had a much deadlier impact than delta — and in a shorter period of time. That's according to research published Friday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

The findings illustrate that a highly contagious virus — even if it tends to cause milder illness — can still confer a substantial amount of death, said the study's lead author, Dr. Jeremy Faust, an emergency physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston."

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/omicron-caused-deaths-delta-northeastern-states-rcna29394

If you are reasonably healthy and not overly old and you are up to date with your vaccines there is still little risk of severe disease from omicron. If you are high risk get vaccinated and be especially careful.
If you are a covidiot who cares what happens to you.
As I wrote, in my county of 260,000 highly vaccinated people there are just two people in the hospital because of covid-and there hasn’t been anyone in the ICU for covid for months.

 

[Good4Nothin]

If you are reasonably healthy and not overly old and you are up to date with your vaccines there is still little risk of severe disease from omicron. If you are high risk get vaccinated and be especially careful.
If you are a covidiot who cares what happens to you.
As I wrote, in my county of 260,000 highly vaccinated people there are just two people in the hospital because of covid-and there hasn’t been anyone in the ICU for covid for months.

In the non-elderly population the “number needed to treat” to prevent a single death runs into the thousands. Re-analysis of randomised controlled trials using the messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) technology suggests a greater risk of serious adverse events from the vaccines than being hospitalised from COVID-19.

This is a peer reviewed article published today. Please stop pushing the vaccines on those who are not at serious risk from covid.

 

[JasperL]

Curing the pandemic of misinformation on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines through real evidence-based medicine - Part 1 | Malhotra | Journal of Metabolic Health

The Journal of Metabolic Health is a peer-reviewed, clinically oriented open access journal covering advances in metabolic health and related disorders. The journal focuses on pathophysiology, prevention, management, and advancing therapy for different patient populations with metabolic health...

insulinresistance.org

That article is why I really shouldn't bother reading your links. It took a while and I learned nothing. I should have stopped when the author referred to getting vaccinated as a "jab." This is a doctor, presumably writing a serious article and uses a slang term, often used derogatorily by vaccine "skeptics." Then he uses his dad for an anecdote, but he tells us he was T2D, metabolic disease, high triglycerides, HBP, the whole metabolic syndrome basket, and all of that is a predictor for heart disease, obviously. Yes, he reversed the metabolic disease with diet, but diet doesn't reverse the damage to the vessels. And he says a "scan" didn't reveal blockages for his father "years" (how many years????) earlier, but that's not an objective test or results. Did he get a calcium score? If so what was that score? He leaves us guessing.

And the rest is just basically an opinion piece. There is little data, and what data he does present is one sided. For example, he uses the vaccine trials for his numbers needed to treat, but those trials don't account for the deadly Delta surge, or Omicron for that matter, and the vaccine trials aren't meant for that kind of analysis, and they were done during a relatively mild season for infections, during extreme lockdowns worldwide. And you simply cannot use the time period in the vaccine trials to tell us the risk of infection, but he does that - tells us the absolute risk of infection was <1% for an unvaccinated person, therefore the absolute risk reduction with vaccination was also less than 1%. That's laughable, because we know the actual infection rate was FAR higher - at least a third of Americans were infected at some point. It's nonsense to extrapolate the risk of infection during the few months of a vaccine trial to the whole of the pandemic, but that's what he does. And a number of his links are just garbage.

Anyway, I didn't learn a thing, so time wasted....

 

[Good4Nothin]

And you simply cannot use the time period in the vaccine trials to tell us the risk of infection, but he does that - tells us the absolute risk of infection was <1% for an unvaccinated person, therefore the absolute risk reduction with vaccination was also less than 1%. That's laughable, because we know the actual infection rate was FAR higher - at least a third of Americans were infected at some point.

He got the absolute risk of covid infection FROM THE TRIAL. Less than one percent of the subjects, whether vaccinated or not, got symptomatic covid.

He used the data that the emergency use grant was based on. There have been no other controlled trials since that.

 

[Good4Nothin]

He got the absolute risk of covid infection FROM THE TRIAL. Less than one percent of the subjects, whether vaccinated or not, got symptomatic covid.

He used the data that the emergency use grant was based on. There have been no other controlled trials since that.

And yes he did describe an anecdote, but MOST of the article is about experimental data. There is NOTHING wrong with describing individual cases!

 

[JasperL]

This is a peer reviewed article published today. Please stop pushing the vaccines on those who are not at serious risk from covid.

Yeah, maybe you should read articles like that a little more critically.

And by your own standards, AT LEAST half the adult population is at "serious risk" from COVID. And that is as always the key is a message that says to everyone - "do your own research" on whether you're in that group, and we know 10s of thousands did that and are now DEAD, likely the vast majority saved with vaccination, many more spent unnecessary days in ICU but lived, often with permanent health effects on the back end. Remember long COVID? I cited the data on vaccine impact and it was substantial.

He got the absolute risk of covid infection FROM THE TRIAL. Less than one percent of the subjects, whether vaccinated or not, got symptomatic covid.

I know he did, said so, and you quoted me acknowledging that, telling you what that absolute risk was DURING THE TRIAL (<1%), then you didn't address the rest of my point.

Me: "That's laughable, because we know the actual infection rate was FAR higher - at least a third of Americans were infected at some point. It's nonsense to extrapolate the risk of infection during the few months of a vaccine trial to the whole of the pandemic, but that's what he does."

So what's the absolute risk of infection, in real life for real people during the COVID era? At least 33%. Not <1%. So given the ACTUAL infection rate of 33% or more, what is the numbers needed to treat? He doesn't even take a stab at this, but it is the number we need to know.

He used the data that the emergency use grant was based on. There have been no other controlled trials since that.

Of course not because researchers cannot ethically post-vaccine randomly assign anyone to the placebo group, or keep them in the placebo group post vaccine, which is what would be required for an RCT over a long period of time. He's using the vaccine trials for a purpose for which they were not intended. And lots of other studies have looked at the death and hospitalization rates by vaccine status, and the benefits of vaccines are crystal clear.

 

[JasperL]

And yes he did describe an anecdote, but MOST of the article is about experimental data. There is NOTHING wrong with describing individual cases!

It's not that he used an anecdote, as I explained, but he didn't even adequately describe the health condition of his anecdotal case, his father. Was the 90% blockage due to the vaccine? He implies it, but there's no EVIDENCE for that because he does not have e.g. calcium scores pre and post vaccine. He tells us "years" but not how many years, etc. How many years ago did he reverse his T2D? Who knows? I went over that, and you ignored it. Of course you did.

 

[jaeger19]

Even Ethel2 said omicron is basically a cold.

So?