https://twitter.com/SnacksJohn/status/1456631139679014920?s=20
I don't have the stats off-hand, but I know this is wrong. Do any patriots have some good stats to share? Feel free to join the fun w/ your own account if you want.
Comments (12)
sorted by:
You may not be familiar with the phrase but...
not ur personal army
I was thinking the same thing.
Just asking for help, fren.
It's not the stats, it's using VAERS that's the problem.
VAERS is a tip line. It displays every tip it gets, regardless of where it comes from, and doctors HAVE to submit tips if an injury occurred after the vaccine, even if they're reasonably sure that the vaccine didn't cause the injury itself.
VAERS itself says nothing in the numbers it provides is verified. The numbers are used to direct researchers on where they should investigate further. As it stands, the vaccine could be 100% safe, and VAERS would look identical to how it does, because again, it's showing you tips its received, not verified vaccine injuries.
https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html
If you want data on vaccine injuries, VAERS is not going to offer you any proof that will convince anyone on the other side, because again, it's a tip line, not a database of verified vaccine problems.
Interesting, thank you. Do you know of anywhere that lists confirmed vaccine injuries? Covid, or otherwise?
Right now, that stuff is mainly running through the CDC, and I know how you guys feel about them.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html
I cannot find a main database of vaccine injuries, largely because confirming that an injury came from a vaccine usually requires an in-depth study of the individual case. So if you're looking for that kind of data, you'd need to deeply research into the medical journals to find those cases and do a meta-analysis on what you find in order to establish some statistical significance.
Which is time consuming and challenging to do.
Essentially, the process works like this:
Something Happens at some point after a vaccine is taken. Death, palsy, the sniffles, whatever.
That injury is reported to VAERS.
That injury is immediately published to VAERS. The injury is not verified to have anything to do with the vaccine before being published to VAERS.
If enough of these reports occurs in some specific locus of the data to create a statistically-significant deviation from the baseline data, researchers will take notice. These researchers can be from anywhere, which is why VAERS is publicly-available information.
The researchers will then go and look at the cases that made up the anomalous data spike.
If researchers can find evidence that the cases actually represent a legitimate case of vaccine injuries, they can then record that data and publish it.
Once the data has been reviewed and verified, organizations like the CDC will note the potential side effect, which highlights it for further investigation by other researchers.
VAERS is really just an early step in the process. And I know there is probably a step or two of this process that you don't trust. But that's why there isn't really a database of vaccine injuries right now. Every alleged injury needs to be verified AFTER it gets sent to VAERS, and that can be done by researchers from literally anywhere.
The only place I can find where verified vaccine injuries are compiled is through the CDC, since they're the central organization running point on this right now in the US. You can try to create your own, but that will require you doing the individual research and tracking down the studies of the researchers who have studied isolated demographics where there was a deviation from the norm in the VAERS data.
Thank you for all this. You're right I don't trust the cdc, but I also don't trust the vaers pushers on here either. I always figure there are three sides to every story and yours, mine, and the truth is somewhere in the middle.
It is wise to be skeptical as long as you are honestly looking for the truth of the matter. We are both in that boat together.
I'm extremely skeptical as well...but I don't have a good rebuttal for these twitter goons b/c in their mind the cdc is infallible.
Good info, thanks fren!
By their own data, those that die the most have over a 99.99% survival rate. 10 in 100,000 = 0.01%
https://citizenfreepress.com/column-3/covid-is-surging-in-waterford-ireland-where-99-7-percent-are-double-vaccinated/