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.
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.