Tittle is wrong. NOT a 3% mortality from jab, 3% mortality of those that had an adverse reaction to the jab. So a percentage of a percentage. Still, worse than simply catching covid, but incorrect numbers don't help our cause.
Well this study has some major flaws then and we need a link to assess its viability. Simple local studies that could done be by an individual in their place of work or by asking people at a public place would disprove a 93% adverse event rate.
Was this a clinical study - or a that follow-up tracking study of vaccinations up to February 2021? We do have a huge problem, and as time goes by we will likely find that more than 2.8% of those vaccinated will end up with lives that are shortened as a result.
But I can't imagine that the number of Relevant Cases shown in the graphic is 93% of those vaccinated.
The IQ of someone who posts a straight up wrong and misleading post like this can't be very high either. It's 3% of people that reported adverse reactions that died, not 3% of people that had the jab. Probably the 3% is inflated too, because someone is much more likely to report a more serious adverse reaction (such as a death).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not promoting the vaccine, but we need to curb the blatant misinformation on here.
So many adverse events that don't look like they are vaccine-induced...blood clots, heart attacks, strokes, etc.
My neighbor was just diagnosed with Leukemia and my other neighbor was diagnosed with ALS - both jabbed and boosted...will they ever tie that back to the vaccine..not likely
The ones I know are all over from nothing to dead, but overall I would question this assertion of 93% adverse event rate. At least I'd like to see more collection data.
You’re math isn’t right, it’s 3% of reported adverse events, which is a faulty sample since it isn’t taking into account people who did not have adverse events. This data isn’t worth much outside of showing that there ARE adverse events (qualitative sample), you can’t conclude any rates without a sample size that includes those who didn’t report any adverse events.
That .93 is not mentioned anywhere, and the study is not linked either so as far as I am concerned, OP is purposefully misappropriating stats in an effort to push a narrative. This movement is not free of liars yet… unfortunately
How can someone know about adverse events, especially hard to miss ones like dying, when they aren't reported? Only by guessing from our sample, which is faulty if VAERS. There are some other data bases, e.g. DoD and CMS, but the DoD was caught editing themselves recently. So far, the best we can do is collect everything and piece it together.
Covid will become a myth. Doctors will be told to delete records or stop diagnosing it. Mentioning that your wife, who died s uddenly, got the Covid vaccine five years ago will be made illegal, hate speech, a threat to democracy, anti science, conspiracy theory.
Chart should show Reporting Interval timeframe AND who (CDC or FDA) generated the numbers. I believe this is the reporting from first vaxs mid-December 2021-Jan or Feb 2022? The 1223 fatalities is huge and should have shut down the vaccines
immediately. Makes it look like the Biden Administration, Pharma, etc. intended to kill people.
These shots were given under EUA. What are the previous death counts that have caused a new vaccine to be pulled off market?
Tittle is wrong. NOT a 3% mortality from jab, 3% mortality of those that had an adverse reaction to the jab. So a percentage of a percentage. Still, worse than simply catching covid, but incorrect numbers don't help our cause.
VAERS is estimated to only record 1-10% of all actual adverse events.
Well this study has some major flaws then and we need a link to assess its viability. Simple local studies that could done be by an individual in their place of work or by asking people at a public place would disprove a 93% adverse event rate.
Was this a clinical study - or a that follow-up tracking study of vaccinations up to February 2021? We do have a huge problem, and as time goes by we will likely find that more than 2.8% of those vaccinated will end up with lives that are shortened as a result.
But I can't imagine that the number of Relevant Cases shown in the graphic is 93% of those vaccinated.
If 93% of people have adverse events and 3% of those events are death let's take a look:
.93 x.03 = .0279 = 2.79% death rate.
I don't see how 3% is wrong if we are rounding up, especially since there are more deaths to come.
And I question the “0.75%” mortality rate. Number sounds made up.
Yes, They did....what a shame...
vaguely rings a bell that, was it BDanon perhaps?
The IQ of someone who posts a straight up wrong and misleading post like this can't be very high either. It's 3% of people that reported adverse reactions that died, not 3% of people that had the jab. Probably the 3% is inflated too, because someone is much more likely to report a more serious adverse reaction (such as a death).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not promoting the vaccine, but we need to curb the blatant misinformation on here.
So many adverse events that don't look like they are vaccine-induced...blood clots, heart attacks, strokes, etc.
My neighbor was just diagnosed with Leukemia and my other neighbor was diagnosed with ALS - both jabbed and boosted...will they ever tie that back to the vaccine..not likely
Could someone share the data source for this please and thank you?
I know several with adverse affect,and one probable suden death of heathy 30 year old,jab statues unknown.
The ones I know are all over from nothing to dead, but overall I would question this assertion of 93% adverse event rate. At least I'd like to see more collection data.
You’re math isn’t right, it’s 3% of reported adverse events, which is a faulty sample since it isn’t taking into account people who did not have adverse events. This data isn’t worth much outside of showing that there ARE adverse events (qualitative sample), you can’t conclude any rates without a sample size that includes those who didn’t report any adverse events.
.93 of people had adverse events. There's really not a big unreported adverse population left, right?
That .93 is not mentioned anywhere, and the study is not linked either so as far as I am concerned, OP is purposefully misappropriating stats in an effort to push a narrative. This movement is not free of liars yet… unfortunately
And yeah...Mutliple adverse events per individual I think as well.
Unfortunately, Pfizer is hiding the truth so reasonable guesses are going to be taken.
Well 93% is a not a reasonable guess, that’s why I am voicing my concern with OPs motives.
How can someone know about adverse events, especially hard to miss ones like dying, when they aren't reported? Only by guessing from our sample, which is faulty if VAERS. There are some other data bases, e.g. DoD and CMS, but the DoD was caught editing themselves recently. So far, the best we can do is collect everything and piece it together.
I think this is the trial data, as-in they were following up with these folks meticulously... could be wrong but that was my understanding.
Covid will become a myth. Doctors will be told to delete records or stop diagnosing it. Mentioning that your wife, who died s uddenly, got the Covid vaccine five years ago will be made illegal, hate speech, a threat to democracy, anti science, conspiracy theory.
It was all planned out. They hopefully didn't expect so many to be so strongly against self-euthanization.
Chart should show Reporting Interval timeframe AND who (CDC or FDA) generated the numbers. I believe this is the reporting from first vaxs mid-December 2021-Jan or Feb 2022? The 1223 fatalities is huge and should have shut down the vaccines immediately. Makes it look like the Biden Administration, Pharma, etc. intended to kill people.
These shots were given under EUA. What are the previous death counts that have caused a new vaccine to be pulled off market?
Not political eh??🧐🧐🧐
Great point!
Can you provide a source of the tweet please?