Dude, the microchips are what is keeping people alive!
2 Likes
JNJ - elevated dangerous blood clot risks
They also found that vaccine recipients are at most risk of developing the condition within the first 15 days after receiving the jab.
Women are also at most risk between ages 30 to 64.
CDC approves the PFE vaccine for kids 5-11, so they should be available directly for those who want them.
Not vaccination, but:
Dr. Scott Gottlieb this morning telling CNBC that the new Pfizer pill, together with a pill from Merck, will mean the end of the pandemic in the USA!
Good-bye COVID-19! 
1 Like
hope heâs right. Has been for the most part. Americans love pills and this will change vax prevention risk/benefit analysis
3 Likes
Heart side effects for mRNA vaccine get more scrutiny. Theories for the mechanism include improper injection (into vein vs muscle) and/or antibodies or immune reactions to the spike protein that inadvertently target similar heart proteins.
1 Like
Naw, theyâre completely safe. Proven! No reason at all to not get them. Youâre a selfish idiot if you dont.
2 Likes
More trolling on that front if youâd like.
Three endocrinologists from the same academic medical center have submitted reports on three cases of people who developed severe dysregulation of their blood sugar just days after mRNA vaccinations. âThe temporal onset of symptoms⌠and the brisk clinical course strongly suggests that the hyperglycemic emergencies were trigged by the COVID-19 vaccination,â the authors wrote.
1 Like
Iâm eligible for the mRNA booster shot. But I think itâs sounding a little effy now.
No big hurry. (me thinks)
Originally the two first shots were all we needed. Changes, always seems that nothing is finalized.
the nature of scienceâŚ
that being said I would do JNJ booster, but all the data Iâve found is for mRNA boosters 
report link:
hmm maybe no booster for my Diabetic mom
1 Like
All those cases had the problems after their first shot, so maybe by the time you got 2 with no problems itâs not an issue for her? itâs hard to know if there were other similar cases elsewhere. I guess you could try to look through VAERS.
2 Likes
Sports fans noticing itâs a dangerous year for many professional players, lots of serious heart issues.
An unusually large number of professional and amateur soccer players have collapsed recently.
They cite over two dozen heart attacks or similar during games, including 5 deaths.
No doubt itâs covid related, the question they arenât asking is whether itâs because they got the virus or the vaccine (or both). The German authorities arenât taking any chances -
Germanyâs Vaccination Commission (STIKO) now advises against Moderna for people under 30 years of age.
1 Like
Glad we didnât get MRNA for my teen. Although I would have preferred to wait for JNJ but theyâre taking their time with kids itâs probably dose related.
Wonder if this has to do with Germans love of local (BioNTech) products though
Any negative news about young kids w. PFE other than cardiac concerns w/ young men. I believe that was also dose related. Will ask them to aspirate (even if they donât know what it is 
)
Well make sure if youâre getting the vaccine for younger kids that they actually give the kids version, which is 1/3 of the dose of the adult / teenaged version. Itâs supposed to be color coded differently, but a couple of cases of younger kids getting the higher dose often had side effects promptly. And, for example, not the adult covid one instead of the flu shot!
These seem pretty narrow cases, but letâs just say I didnât find any of those on the front page of Google searching for âadverse reactions covid childrenâ or similar but did on another search engine.
5 Likes
Good points as always @xerty
Glad we didnât get MRNA now https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/11/moderna-says-covid-vaccine-has-fewer-breakthrough-cases-than-pfizers.html
They better lower the dosage for âlittleâ adults.
This was a panel hosted by one of the senators for raising awareness of covid vaccine injuries. There are doctors, academics, healthcare workers, and of course normal people who got the vaccine and reacted badly to it for whatever reason. I found all the speakers credible and not obviously politically motivated. Itâs long even at 2x, but the stories are heartbreaking.
panel discussion video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lepqvdXoA2E
in addition to some unlucky people having terrible side effects (paralysis / wheelchair, neural damage and pain, heart damage and ongoing problems, immune disregulation, excessive new allergies and inflammation, sometimes death and, not infrequently in severe cases, bad enough that sufferers killed themselves), it was also clear from their testimony that
- few doctors are willing to diagnose or consider vaccine associated injuries or health problems, due to reputational pressure / fear / intimidation
- some (many?) doctors wonât report these cases to VAERS, making it unrepresentative
- the FDA, CDC, etc, have no interest and routinely ignore these peopleâs attempts to bring attention to their cases
- no compensation is available, either from the drug companies or the traditional government vaccine injury fund for covid vaccine injuries
- trial data is not being provided from the companies to external scientists, at least not for several more years (âtrust usâ)
- side effect monitoring/ logging software only listed expected and fairly minor typical vaccines issues, making it difficult to report these unexpected mRNA issues
- trial participants who had a severe reaction to shot 1 where excluded from the trial data as âwithdrawnâ since they didnât get the 2nd shot
- government agencies like OSHA or military medical services are refusing to track vaccine injuries and reassigning those who diagnose them
- Facebook is complicit in disrupting and banning vaccine survivors support groups after they became aware of them
- academic journals refuse to publish many submitted papers investigating potential harms of vaccines, off label generic drug prospects against covid, or academic critiques of vaccine trial results (ânot a priorityâ)
in short, the regulatory process and political environment is such that these severe side effects are systematically not being reported in the trials, not being looked for in the general population, reporting them is discouraged, and media coverage is actively hostile.
I donât know what your prior was on how risky these vaccines were, but it sounds like you need to multiply it by 10x or more. This matters especially for decisions for healthy kids where their covid risks are already low, and Iâm reconsidering my stance on boosters in non-high-risk adults as well, myself included.
âsafe and effectiveâ
ETA: in further confirmation that anything vaccine risk related is being censored and suppressed, the YouTube video I linked above has been deleted and the Senator banned from posting. Hereâs a backup.
3 Likes
Was this documented, or is it just an unsubstantiated claim? Because thatâs unforgivable if true, but Iâm having a hard time believing it.
Several injured people made this claim, and with more detail, the speaker at 2:39:00 in the AZN trial. This is the paper results and protocol documents for that trial
https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2105290?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed
https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa2105290/suppl_file/nejmoa2105290_protocol.pdf
The adverse events procedure are in section 8 and appendix B from the latter. From that document ,
All participants will be assessed for efficacy and safety. The first 3 000 participants randomized will also participate in a substudy assessing the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of AZD1222.
Thatâs 10% of the total 30k trial, 20k of which got the vaccine vs 10k with the placebo.
Participants in the substudy will have additional assessments for predefined solicited AEs for 7 days post each dose of study intervention and for humoral and cellular immune responses. Solicited AEs are defined in Section 8.3.7.
Each participant who has received at least one dose of study intervention will be followed for the full study period unless consent is withdrawn specifically from further study participation, or the participant is lost to follow-up.
A participant may withdraw from the study at any time at his/her own request, or may be withdrawn at any time at the discretion of the investigator for safety, behavioral, compliance, or administrative reasons.
Room for bias perhaps but not evidence of that.
I think itâs clear from paper that the vaccine efficacy data excluded anyone who withdrew or otherwise didnât complete the 2 dose plan or was lost to the study, didnât get relevant tests, etc. from the supplemental notes,
All efficacy analyses were based on the fully vaccinated analysis set (FVAS) unless otherwise specified, which included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 seronegative at baseline, received two doses of trial intervention, and who remained in the trial 15 days or more after their second dose without having had a prior confirmed SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCRâ positive infection.
furthermore, if you looked at the % of initial trial participants who made it thru to the fully vaccinated group, it was higher in the vaccine arm and relative sizes of groups removed for various reasons were similar. So I wouldnât think the efficacy data would be biased by the final trial inclusion conditions, but thatâs not the safety part tho.
For example, one of the speakers in the video had transverse myelitis and was paralyzed from the waist down due to a spinal cord injury. The AZN trial was halted for this condition (3 cases, 2 vaccine / 1 placebo), and judged one vaccine arm case for be possible related to the vaccine. For reference, given the time and size of the trial, about 1 case was expected in the vaccine arm, so 2 was slightly elevated but not obviously a strong signal.
However, one of the important questions in the assessment of an adverse event is whether the medical professional judges it to be causally related to the vaccine or not. They gave this specific guideline
Consistency with known IMP profile. Was the AE consistent with the previous knowledge of the suspect IMP (pharmacology and toxicology) or drugs of the same pharmacological class? Or could the AE be anticipated from its pharmacological properties?
so to the extent some of these vaccine side effects were not âtypical vaccine side effectsâ there may have been a bias towards not reporting them as related. Of the half a dozen guidances given for causality (Appendix B3, page 76/78), the only one that really could have mattered for an unexpected outcome was timeliness of the health problem vs vaccine administration. None of the others could reasonably apply. They were looking out for immediate allergic reactions, low platelet issues, worsening respiratory issues, and certain neurological issues so those should have been reported regardless.
The main paper only discussed the âsolicitedâ adverse events, ie fever, fatigue, site soreness, etc, that were expected and handled via their reporting app for all patients. unsolicited adverse events, such as all these weird ones, were not discussed in the paper except for the trial halting one mentioned above, but there was more info in the paper appendix starting on page 31 in tables S4-S5.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa2105290/suppl_file/nejmoa2105290_appendix.pdf
The reported MAAEs (seeing a doc for some issue) did show elevated incidences of heart issues, tinnitus, and a few other things people mentioned in the hearing. Broadly, the reported adverse events at a high level, across the full study, seemed to be similar in most ways between the control and the placebo groups on a relative basis. However, note also from the supplement,
SAEs, MAAEs and AESIs are reported through trial completion or withdrawal.
So all the âunexpectedâ stuff not logged via the app appear to indeed have been truncated as of trial withdrawal, so if they somehow were systematically withdrawing patients with bad reactions early on (which the above quotes show the doctors can do, not just the patients), their ongoing issues would not be recorded past that withdrawal designation.
1 Like