To Be Vaccinated or NOT To Be Vaccinated? That is the Question.
Comments
-
Fauci: COVID-19 Hospitalizations Rising Among Vaccinated People.
“We’ve got to start right now getting anybody who’s eligible … to get them boosted,” Fauci told NBC. In the same interview, he called for people, regardless of their vaccination status, to wear a mask.
The push to have people receive the booster shot comes as some officials have publicly mulled whether or not to deem anyone fully vaccinated if they haven’t received a booster dose.
I wonder why? "Give them an inch, they will take a mile." There is no stopping or end in sight. CM
-
Abstract 10712: Mrna COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured by the PULS Cardiac Test: a Warning
Originally published8 Nov 2021Circulation. 2021;144:A10712
Abstract
Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test (GD Biosciences, Inc, Irvine, CA) a clinically validated measurement of multiple protein biomarkers which generates a score predicting the 5 yr risk (percentage chance) of a new Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). The score is based on changes from the norm of multiple protein biomarkers including IL-16, a proinflammatory cytokine, soluble Fas, an inducer of apoptosis, and Hepatocyte Growth Factor (HGF)which serves as a marker for chemotaxis of T-cells into epithelium and cardiac tissue, among other markers. Elevation above the norm increases the PULS score, while decreases below the norm lowers the PULS score.The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients.This report summarizes those results. A total of 566 pts, aged 28 to 97, M:F ratio 1:1 seen in a preventive cardiology practice had a new PULS test drawn from 2 to 10 weeks following the 2nd COVID shot and was compared to the previous PULS score drawn 3 to 5 months previously pre- shot. Baseline IL-16 increased from 35=/-20 above the norm to 82 =/- 75 above the norm post-vac; sFas increased from 22+/- 15 above the norm to 46=/-24 above the norm post-vac; HGF increased from 42+/-12 above the norm to 86+/-31 above the norm post-vac. These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac.We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.
-
Now we have spike mutations and variants like Democrats (always some new disaster about to strike). That last could stir my worry-o-meter more than any virus ever has. Actually, my worry-o-meter quit ticking altogether, long ago. I don't think it works anymore.
-
-
-
Urgent! A must read!
Inventor of mRNA vaccine technology speaks out (you NEED to see this)
Can you believe that they tried to CENSOR this man?
Do you know who this famous Doctor is?
Remember this face, because this is Dr. Robert Malone:
- Awarded 9 patents for mRNA and DNA research
- The first to create working results in tadpoles, chicks, and mice, proving his ideas.
- Known for making HUGE contributions to treating viruses such as HIV, SARS, and Ebola.
Dr Malone is the inventor of the mRNA vaccine technology... And he's speaking out about what's been going on behind the scenes and what's being hidden from you...
Grab this brand new free report from Dr Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA vaccine technology and hear the REAL truth about what big pharma and the government are hiding from you...
> Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA vaccines speaks out
I want to see Bill, any Vaccine Promoter or Zealots try explain the testimony of this man away. This is not a test or a joke. Please take this one serious. We are all ... CM
PS. You will thank me for this (not that I need it or it's required). This truth can't be kept in the dark.
-
Read the closed captioned, please. Do you believe his message? CM
PS. Make a transcript, if you can, for all to read.
Update:
Dr. Andreas Noack published this video on November 23rd, 2021 at 10am
The video was subsequently translated by Stefan Reich on November 25th, 2021 to add in the English subtitles.
IT IS CRITICAL TO WATCH THE NEXT VIDEO DATED NOVEMBER 27TH, 2021. DR. ANDREAS NOACK WAS MURDERED AFTER RELEASING THIS VIDEO.
***DOWNLOAD: The world must go to www.bit.ly/awcevidence and download all pdf's and videos.
All the evidence the world needs to see to understand the COVID19 SARS-CoV-2 LIE will be found.
www.awarriorcalls.com the world must go for truth and the solution!
Christopher James' alternate platforms... where the TRUTH will be found and the Solution moving forward.
Telegram: t.me/aWarriorCalls
Live Stream Link: aWarriorCalls.com/LiveStream
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4xG9TWLBIuWZuGXwVaS20w?
Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/awarriorcalls
Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/K6tBDPiVYwHO/
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-443257
-
Good grief. Is the world flat, too?
-
If you have taken the COVID-19 vaccines, you may have any one of the symptoms below:
God, help us all! CM
PS. @Wolfgang, see this before you leave! You warned us. Now, Bill, what do you have to say? This is truly a world gone mad! CM
-
-
It’s the mark of the JW! Don’t take it!
-
Thoughts on the vaccine:
- The vaccine is new, so of course, it does not have years of testing for safety. We don't know for sure how safe it is but testing so far indicates it is quite safe--but not 100%.
- No vaccine ever produced has had as much prior research as the Covid mRNA vaccine. Many years of thorough research went into this technology to combat cancer. When Covid came along, the technology was a good match to try. The research behind it was already extensive. The testing for safety is not extensive and cannot be until we have years of data of actual use. Do we wait that long or not? (My opinion is that each person should make that choice--not a mandate).
- The vaccine makes no difference in whether or not a person will get "Covid." The difference it makes is in the severity of symptoms.
- Simplified Explanation of #3: When a person gets a virus, the body takes 7-10 days to identify the protein intruder and develop a long-term antigen strategy to defeat it. Once the antigens (and other battle gear) are developed, a virus can be defeated in about 2 days. If you get a cold, your body needs about 7 days to build the battle gear to defeat it. Then it needs about 2 days to destroy it. The newly constructed defense system remains in place for months or longer. The Covid vaccine does not prevent getting Covid; it simply bypasses the 7 days needed to build a defense. Instead of having symptoms for 7 days, you beat the virus in about two. Many people may hardly realize a battle is occurring--which is why you feel so much better the last couple days of after a cold, or Covid.
- The vaccine provides better immunization than natural immunization. Why? While the natural process is excellent and broad, it also allows the virus to do a great deal of damage to the body before it is defeated. The vaccine accomplishes nearly the same result with little or no (known) damage to the body.
- The double vaccine works very well for about 4-6 mo. Then is slowly diminishes in effectiveness. A booster extends this time of higher resistance.
- Covid is unlike most other similar viruses. It produces strange results in humans: The virus itself is little different from the flu, but the inflammatory response it causes is quite different. The inflammatory response is what does damage to heart, liver, brain, lungs, etc. It leaves behind a lot of scar tissue, especially causing permanent damage to alveoli in the lungs (the little air sacs become gaping holes unable to exchange gases). The damage is not small. Most people recover fine from Covid. The damage left behind (especially in the lungs) by even a moderate "bad" Covid response is extensive, varied, and permanent. The vaccine does not prevent Covid but does reduce this permanent damage.
I am not a medical professional. What I wrote above reflects my understanding from medical professionals I trust.
-
What is this? CM
-
VICTORY! VICTORY! VICTORY! VICTORY! VICTORY! VICTORY! VICTORY! VICTORY! VICTORY!
Judge Rejects FDA’s 75 Year Delay On Big-Pharma Data
by Admin January 7, 2022, 11:45 pm
On behalf of a client, my firm requested that the FDA produce all the data submitted by Pfizer to license its Covid-19 vaccine. The FDA asked the Court for permission to only be required to produce at a rate of 500 pages per month, which would have taken over 75 years to produce all the documents.
I am pleased to report that a federal judge soundly rejected the FDA’s request and ordered the FDA to produce all the data at a clip of 55,000 pages per month!
This is a great win for transparency and removes one of the strangleholds federal “health” authorities have had on the data needed for independent scientists to offer solutions and address serious issues with the current vaccine program – issues which include waning immunity, variants evading vaccine immunity, and, as the CDC has confirmed, that the vaccines do not prevent transmission.
No person should ever be coerced to engage in an unwanted medical procedure. And while it is bad enough the government violated this basic liberty right by mandating the Covid-19 vaccine, the government also wanted to hide the data by waiting to fully produce what it relied upon to license this product until almost every American alive today is dead. That form of governance is destructive to liberty and antithetical to the openness required in a democratic society.
In ordering the release of the documents in a timely manner, the Judge recognized that the release of this data is of paramount public importance and should be one of the FDA’s highest priorities. He then aptly quoted James Madison as saying a “popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy” and John F. Kennedy as explaining that a “nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.”
KEEP America STRONG! CM
-
🙏Praying to God for merciful magnitude of Holy Healing in all life domains for many, many, many people: heart (emotional), mind (mental), soul (social), strength (physical), & worship (spiritual) 🙏
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus 10 November 2021 State of Illinois Department of Public Health Vaccine Breakthrough data through 10 Nov 2021 shows 935 Deaths being 0.013% of Fully Vaccinated Population, which is an increase of 57 deaths. Data through 3 Nov 2021 showed 878 Deaths being 0.012 % of Fully Vaccinated Population. Apologies for my sad guess of 60+ breakthrough deaths for Wed 10 Nov being 5 % too high.
State of Illinois Department of Public Health Vaccine Breakthrough data through 9 Feb 2022 shows 3,147 Deaths being 0.039% of Fully Vaccinated Population (in three months, sadly noticed breakthrough death percentage increase of 300 % that also happened in Minnesota).
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus 13 November 2021 Breakthrough death rates as of 12 Nov 2021 are: 0.0197% in South Carolina, 0.015% in Minnesota, 0.013% in Illinois, 0.01% in Massachusetts
Breakthrough death rates update: 0.0302% in South Carolina (782 dead as of 8 Feb 2022), 0.045% in Minnesota (1,601 dead as of 15 Jan 2022), 0.04% (2,032 dead as of 5 Feb 2022)
The COVID-19 Mortality Risk report published by CDC on 29 Oct 2021 includes a box "COVID-19 vaccines are safe" A study of 11 million people found no increased risk of death among COVID-19 vaccine recipients.
Another correlated item is Life Insurance payout in 2021 being significantly higher than 2020: (Life Insurance companies had anticipated safe & effective COVID-19 vaccine reducing death rate in 2021, but actual death rate increased significantly)
Observation is mainstream media Reuters.com web site having world sections: nine geographic areas with "The Great Reboot" & "Reuters Next"
My human speculation wonders if our spiritual adversary is hiding "The Great Reboot" (Great Reset of global depopulation) in plain sight.
The word "vaccine" comes from Latin ("from cows"). Milk maids who got sick from cow pox had natural immunity against small pox. Wikipedia => Vaccine includes History. Real world health data evidence simply shows the COVID experimental mRNA therapy is NOT an effective vaccine.
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus 13 November 2021 The United States population on November 10, 2021 was: 332,915,145
The United States population on February 12, 2022 was 332,496,568 (decrease of 418,577 since November 10, 2021)
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus 13 November 2021 On 11 Nov 2021, one birth is every 8 seconds and one death is every 11 seconds. Sad expectation is death rate change as more people die.
On 14 Feb 2022, one birth is every 9 seconds and one death is every 10 seconds. Sadly suspect birth & death rates are showing vaccination effects.
Sadly more tears 😭 for me (followed by more 🙏 Prayers for Holy God Healing) as vaccination is harming U.S military:
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference.
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
Taking, as Jesus did, this sinful world as it is, not as I would have it;
Trusting that You will make all things right if I surrender to Your Will;
That I may be reasonably happy in this life and supremely joyful with You Forever in the next. Amen.
🙏Praying fervently (crying out load) for merciful magnitude of Holy God healing in all life domains for multitude of people in this world 🙏❤️ Thankful for Holy God choosing who, what, when, & where to heal. Immensely Thankful for Holy God's Loving Presence 🙏❤️
Keep Smiling 😊
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:
State of Illinois Department of Public Health Vaccine Breakthrough data through 9 Feb 2022 shows 3,147 Deaths being 0.039% of Fully Vaccinated Population (in three months, sadly noticed breakthrough death percentage increase of 300 % that also happened in Minnesota).
According to data found on the SAME site to which you linked... (the web page from which I downloaded that data is HERE)
- Through 9 Feb 2022, Illinois recorded a total of 31,679 COVID deaths
- That means the 3,147 deaths among the state's fully vaccinated population that you noted accounted for 9.93% of all COVID deaths in the state.
- Which means that COVID deaths among the state's UNvaccinated population - a total of 28,532 deaths - accounted 90.07% of all COVID deaths in the state.
Basically, that's a 90/10 percentage split of COVID deaths in Illinois between the unvaccinated and the vaccinated. Do you consider a 90/10 split to be a statistically significant difference between the two percentages - i.e. in Illinois, the vaccinated have been much less likely to die of COVID than have been the unvaccinated - or do you consider such a split to be pretty much like a coin flip - i.e. in Illinois, the vaccinated have been about as likely to die from COVID as were the unvaccinated?
Turning back to the data (again, from the SAME site to which you linked)...
- When you do the math, it turns out those 28,532 deaths among the UNvaccinated represent approximately 0.65% of the UNvaccinated population.
- So COVID deaths represent 0.039% of the vaccinated population and 0.65% of the UNvaccinated population.
- In terms of the percentage of the respective populations in Illinois, COVID has killed 16.8 times more among the UNvaccinated population than it has among the vaccinated population.
When COVID has killed nearly 17 times the percentage of one group in Illinois as it has of another group, do you consider that to be a statistically significant difference - i.e. COVID has impacted the UNvaccinated population in Illinois far more than it has impacted the vaccinated population - or do you see that difference as pretty much a coin flip - i.e. COVID has affected the two populations in Illinois about the same?
Were I to analyze the data from South Carolina and Minnesota, the results... and therefore, my questions to you... would be the same.
I don't have the time or patience needed to unravel the confusion/distraction/misunderstanding present in the remainder of your post, so let's start with the data and questions I've presented to you here.
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:
State of Illinois Department of Public Health Vaccine Breakthrough data through 9 Feb 2022 shows 3,147 Deaths being 0.039% of Fully Vaccinated Population (in three months, sadly noticed breakthrough death percentage increase of 300 % that also happened in Minnesota).
AN ADDITIONAL LINK:
According to THIS PAGE on the SAME site to which you linked in your most recent post, in the month of January, at least, "almost 90% currently hospitalized with COVID-19 are unvaccinated." That's another 90/10 percentage split in which the 90% are the unvaccinated. So again I ask you: Do you consider this 90/10 split to report a statistically significant difference between the health outcomes related to COVID-19 for the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations in the state of Illinois, or do you rather consider the split to reflect basically a coin flip, that in Illinois, the vaccinated are as likely to be hospitalized for COVID as are the unvaccinated?
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus February 14 State of Illinois Department of Public Health Vaccine Breakthrough data through 9 Feb 2022 shows 3,147 Deaths being 0.039% of Fully Vaccinated Population (in three months, sadly noticed breakthrough death percentage increase of 300 % that also happened in Minnesota).
@Bill_Coley February 15 According to data found on the SAME site to which you linked... (the web page from which I downloaded that data is HERE)
@Bill_Coley February 15 * Through 9 Feb 2022, Illinois recorded a total of 31,679 COVID deaths
@Bill_Coley February 15 * That means the 3,147 deaths among the state's fully vaccinated population that you noted accounted for 9.93% of all COVID deaths in the state.
@Bill_Coley February 15 * Which means that COVID deaths among the state's vaccinated population - a total of 28,532 deaths - accounted 90.07% of all COVID deaths in the state.
@Bill_Coley February 15 Basically, that's a 90/10 percentage split of COVID deaths in Illinois between the unvaccinated and the vaccinated. Do you consider a 90/10 split to be a statistically significant difference between the two percentages - i.e. in Illinois, the vaccinated have been much less likely to die of COVID than have been the unvaccinated - or do you consider such a split to be pretty much like a coin flip - i.e. in Illinois, the vaccinated have been about as likely to die from COVID as were the unvaccinated?
In Illinois, is unvaccinated people having 9.1x (90.07% / 9.93%) greater risk of dying compared to vaccinated people significant when compared to the CDC's 11.3x greater risk as of 9 November 2021 ? - or do you consider the 20% more likely 9.1x to be insiginifcant compared to 11.3x ?
Wayback machine for web site https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effectiveness/index.html shows CDC's 11.3x greater risk
On 10 November 2021, CDC updated COVID-19 Effectiveness to remove greater risk rates (to me, those rates were optimistic propaganda).
@Bill_Coley February 15 According to THIS PAGE on the SAME site to which you linked in your most recent post, in the month of January, at least, "almost 90% currently hospitalized with COVID-19 are unvaccinated." That's another 90/10 percentage split in which the 90% are the unvaccinated. So again I ask you: Do you consider this 90/10 split to report a statistically significant difference between the health outcomes related to COVID-19 for the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations in the state of Illinois, or do you rather consider the split to reflect basically a coin flip, that in Illinois, the vaccinated are as likely to be hospitalized for COVID as are the unvaccinated?
In 2022, Illinois Public Health Officials included "almost 90% currently hospitalized with COVID-19 are unvaccinated." on Friday, January 14, 2022 in the weekly news announcement of new Coronavirus Disease over the past week. All other 2022 weekly news announcements provide no insight about unvaccinated % currently hospitalized.
As of Friday, February 11, 2022, in Iowa, those not fully vaccinated accounted for:
- 67.4% COVID-19 Patients in ICU
- 53.7% Patients Hospitalized because of COVID-19
My human speculation is hospitalization % in Illinois becoming like neighboring Iowa (albeit not know how soon). As of 11 February 2022 in Iowa, COVID-19 hospitalization in ICU for unvaccinated is 2.07x greater risk while overall hospitalization is 1.16x greater risk.
@Bill_Coley November 7 There is NO DOUBT about the vaccines' safety... unless one doesn't believe that a 95% reduction of risk is significant.
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus 8 November 2021 Summer time "safety" does not reflect known "vaccine" efficacy decline nor recent increase of breakthrough cases, hospitalizations, & deaths.
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus 8 November 2021 How many are killed by "vaccine" (adverse side effects) to save one life from COVID virus death ?
@Bill_Coley November 8 Recent data on the Pfizer and Modern vaccines show a decline in efficacy against infection over time, driven significantly by the increased transmissibility of the Delta variant. HOWEVER, the data ALSO show little decline in the vaccines' protection against hospitalization and death. As THIS STUDY concludes about the Pfizer vaccine, "With up to 6 months of follow-up and despite a gradually declining trend in vaccine efficacy, BNT162b2 had a favorable safety profile and was highly efficacious in preventing COVID-19. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04368728)."
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus 8 November 2021 "Operation Warp Speed" public roll out started less than a year ago, noticed URL for THIS STUDY includes date of 28 Jul 2021, which may have been the best time for "safe & effective" declaration (before increasing adverse side effect risks eclipses declining efficacy).
@Bill_Coley 8 November 2021 Where is the official data to prove that the conclusions of the July 28 study are not still valid? They don't exist, I contend. But it is for certain that you didn't present them.
Three months later, does increasing COVID breakthrough deaths published by various State Health Departments qualify as official data ?
What does decline in efficacy really mean inside a human body ? Is Vaccine-induced Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (VAIDS) happening to vaccinated people (as time elapses, vaccinated people become more likely to experience illness & death from many causes, as reflected in Life Insurance payout increase in 2021) ?
To me, the question "To Be Vaccinated or NOT To Be Vaccinated ?" has a Biblical counterpart: Which to disobey ? Peascefully obey human masters OR "Thou shalt NOT murder" (mass murder magnitude world wide from vaccination is humanly awful to ponder, lots of tears 😭)
🙏Praying fervently (crying out load) for merciful magnitude of Holy God healing in all life domains for multitude of people in this world 🙏❤️ Thankful for Holy God choosing who, what, when, & where to heal. Immensely Thankful for Holy God's Loving Presence 🙏❤️
Keep Smiling 😊
-
It's astounding that there's ANY debate about this.
Here's a chart from the CDC reporting the COVID-related hospitalization rate throughout the year 2021 for persons age 18+....
The same CDC webpage summarizes the effect of vaccinations on hospitalization in the month of December 2021 this way....
There is NO debate about this.
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:
In Illinois, is unvaccinated people having 9.1x (90.07% / 9.93%) greater risk of dying compared to vaccinated people significant when compared to the CDC's 11.3x greater risk as of 9 November 2021 ? - or do you consider the 20% more likely 9.1x to be insiginifcant compared to 11.3x ?
Yes, a risk of death that is 9.1x greater among the unvaccinated compared to the vaccinated IS significant. If for the next project you took on in life you were offered two (and only two) options - the two options pursuing the identical outcome - and you were told that one option had a 9.1x greater chance of complete failure than the other, would that information figure into your decision as to which option you chose?
The CDC's 11.3x number reflected THE NATION in November 2021; the Illinois data reflected ONE STATE as of February 2022. Hence, the two numbers are not directly comparable.
On 10 November 2021, CDC updated COVID-19 Effectiveness to remove greater risk rates (to me, those rates were optimistic propaganda).
See the chart I posted above. Hospitalization-related risk rates are currently available on the CDC site.
Without data to back it up - which you can't provide because it doesn't exist - your claim of "optimistic propaganda" is itself propaganda.
As of Friday, February 11, 2022, in Iowa, those not fully vaccinated accounted for:
67.4% COVID-19 Patients in ICU
53.7% Patients Hospitalized because of COVID-19
- 67.4% of ALL ICU patients in the state, NOT specifically of COVID-related ICU patients, so that percentage has little utility in this discussion
- I'm surprised by the 53.7% number. As the CDC's data reports, Iowa's experience is not like the rest of the nation's. I agree with the message the Iowa website provides just beneath the 53.7% figure, however: "Getting vaccinated is the most important step in reducing the risk of becoming ill or hospitalized from COVID-19."
I hope ALL states soon become like Iowa and then improve from there! But until your "human speculation" has data to back it up, I will stick with the data, which say the nation as a whole is NOT like Iowa.
What does decline in efficacy really mean inside a human body ? Is Vaccine-induced Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (VAIDS) happening to vaccinated people (as time elapses, vaccinated people become more likely to experience illness & death from many causes, as reflected in Life Insurance payout increase in 2021) ?
It means, as if often the case with vaccines, that over time the COVID vaccines lose SOME of their effectiveness, but ALSO that the vaccinated remain FAR better protected against serious illness, hospitalization, and death from COVID than the unvaccinated. That's what the DATA show, not my "human speculation."
VAIDS is a baseless conspiracy theory; there is NO SUCH THING. As one expert quoted in the AP story declares, "if such a thing as VAIDS existed, we would have detected it by now."
To me, the question "To Be Vaccinated or NOT To Be Vaccinated ?" has a Biblical counterpart: Which to disobey ? Peascefully obey human masters OR "Thou shalt NOT murder" (mass murder magnitude world wide from vaccination is humanly awful to ponder, lots of tears 😭)
Or the question can be put this way: Do we base our COVID-related views and actions on science and data, or on "human speculation" and baseless conspiracy theories. I choose science and data.
-
@Bill_Coley February 15 The same CDC webpage summarizes the effect of vaccinations on hospitalization in the month of December 2021 this way....
CDC webpage https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#covidnet-hospitalizations-vaccination includes:
These data were posted on February 3, 2022 and reflect hospitalizations through December 25, 2021. COVID-NET hospitalizations data are preliminary and subject to change as more data become available. Data will be updated monthly.
Human anticipating CDC updates in 2022 to show decline in all posted comparison rates.
Minnesota Department of Health can be refined to show the first week in 2022:
Ages 12-17 is 1.95x Higher. Ages 18-49 is 3.34x Higher, Ages 50-64 is 4.05x Higher, Age 65+ is 10.77x Higher. Covid hospitalizations of fully vaccinated in Minnesota for the first week of 2022 were significantly higher than published CDC rates by age group through December 25, 2021.
South Carolina Department of Health has a report on Feb. 3, 2022:
Following an initial analysis that revealed the overwhelming number of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in the first two weeks of June 2021 were among residents who were not fully vaccinated, DHEC identified similar results when looking at provisional data for the time frame of Dec. 16– Jan. 15, 2022. Results of this analysis are below.
- Among the 38,414 reported cases where we were able to determine vaccine status, 23,606 (61.5%) of cases were considered not fully vaccinated*.
- Among the 1,328 reported cases who were hospitalized with COVID and where we were able to determine vaccine status, 624 (47.0%) were considered not fully vaccinated*.
- Among the 371 reported deaths from COVID where vaccine status was able to be determined, 238 (64.2%) were considered not fully vaccinated*.
Footnote:
* An individual is considered fully vaccinated 14 days or more after completion of either a 2-dose or a 1-dose FDA-approved vaccine series.
For the period December 16, 2021 to January 15, 2022 South Carolina shows 53.0% fully vaccinated were hospitalized. Unvaccinated rate is 0.887x compared to fully vaccinated.
California Department of Health shows "From January 17, 2022 to January 23, 2022, unvaccinated people were 11.4 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 than people who received their booster dose."
In California on December 25, 2021 unvaccinated people were 17 times more likely to hospitalized than people who received their booster dose.
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus February 15 To me, the question "To Be Vaccinated or NOT To Be Vaccinated ?" has a Biblical counterpart: Which to disobey ? Peascefully obey human masters OR "Thou shalt NOT murder" (mass murder magnitude world wide from vaccination is humanly awful to ponder, lots of tears 😭)
@Bill_Coley February 15 Or the question can be put this way: Do we base our COVID-related views and actions on science and data, or on "human speculation" and baseless conspiracy theories. I choose science and data.
Puzzling data discrepancy observation is unvaccinated to vaccinated hospitalization rate having over an order of magnitude difference in 2022.
My apologies for humanly misspelling Peacefully as Peascefully.
Keep Smiling 😊
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:
Human anticipating CDC updates in 2022 to show decline in all posted comparison rates.
I think we all hope for declining numbers throughout this year.
For the period December 16, 2021 to January 15, 2022 South Carolina shows 53.0% fully vaccinated were hospitalized. Unvaccinated rate is 0.887x compared to fully vaccinated.
Just as one cold or hot day in one part of the U.S. doesn't prove anything about global climate change, so does one set of numbers from one 31 day period in one state's experience of the pandemic prove anything about the efficacy of vaccines writ large. (Though make sure you click the various other dates available on the S.C. website. You'll find that throughout 2021, unvaccinated persons made up 2/3-3/4 of all deaths, the farther back you go, the higher the percentage trended.)
You made no comment about the CDC chart on hospitalizations with which I began my previous post. Perhaps because that chart demonstrated without doubt that vaccines + boosters profoundly reduce the incidence of serious illness, hospitalization, and death from COVID?
California Department of Health shows "From January 17, 2022 to January 23, 2022, unvaccinated people were 11.4 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 than people who received their booster dose."
In California on December 25, 2021 unvaccinated people were 17 times more likely to hospitalized than people who received their booster dose.
I accept the California data as accurate, just as I accept the South Carolina and Iowa data as accurate. Do you?
Puzzling data discrepancy observation is unvaccinated to vaccinated hospitalization rate having over an order of magnitude difference in 2022.
The numbers in certain specific locations seem to vary from the trend nationwide, but in total, there is no doubt that vaccines + boosters improve outcomes for their recipients. Again I call your attention to the CDC hospitalization chart about which you chose not to make any comment.
EDIT: I forgot to ask you to address the question I raised in my previous post regarding the significance of a 9.1x increase in the likelihood of death: If for the next project you took on in life you were offered two (and only two) options - the two options pursuing the identical outcome - and you were told that one option had a 9.1x greater chance of complete failure than the other, would that information figure into your decision as to which option you chose?
-
@Bill_Coley February 15 You made no comment about the CDC chart on hospitalizations with which I began my previous post. Perhaps because that chart demonstrated without doubt that vaccines + boosters profoundly reduce the incidence of serious illness, hospitalization, and death from COVID?
Likewise noted you made no comment about my earlier February 14 comments
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus February 14 The COVID-19 Mortality Risk report published by CDC on 29 Oct 2021 includes a box "COVID-19 vaccines are safe" A study of 11 million people found no increased risk of death among COVID-19 vaccine recipients.
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus February 14 Another correlated item is Life Insurance payout in 2021 being significantly higher than 2020: (Life Insurance companies had anticipated safe & effective COVID-19 vaccine reducing death rate in 2021, but actual death rate increased significantly)
One data point missing from CDC and State Health departments is the number of people who died within 14 days of receiving a vaccine shot (correlation may be different than causation, but 😭 saddened by reports of many who died suddenly that lack an external death cause).
CDC published Reflections on the 1976 Swine Flu Vaccination Program that includes a couple salient observations:
Soon, however, NIIP received the first of 2 crippling blows to hopes to immunize "every man, woman, and child." The first was later in 1976, when instead of boxes of bottled vaccine, the vaccine manufacturers delivered an ultimatum — that the federal government indemnify them against claims of adverse reactions as a requirement for release of the vaccines. The government quickly capitulated to industry's demand for indemnification. While the manufacturers' ultimatum reflected the trend of increased litigiousness in American society, its unintended, unmistakable subliminal message blared "There's something wrong with this vaccine." This public misperception, warranted or not, ensured that every coincidental health event that occurred in the wake of the swine flu shot would be scrutinized and attributed to the vaccine.
What NIIP did not and could not survive, however, was the second blow, finding cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) among persons receiving swine flu immunizations. As of 1976, >50 "antecedent events" had been identified in temporal relationship to GBS, events that were considered as possible factors in its cause. The list included viral infections, injections, and "being struck by lightning." Whether or not any of the antecedents had a causal relationship to GBS was, and remains, unclear. When cases of GBS were identified among recipients of the swine flu vaccines, they were, of course, well covered by the press. Because GBS cases are always present in the population, the necessary public health questions concerning the cases among vaccine recipients were "Is the number of cases of GBS among vaccine recipients higher than would be expected? And if so, are the increased cases the result of increased surveillance or a true increase?" Leading epidemiologists debated these points, but the consensus, based on the intensified surveillance for GBS (and other conditions) in recipients of the vaccines, was that the number of cases of GBS appeared to be an excess.
Decades later has mainstream media often repeating CDC mantra "COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective". If COVID-19 vaccines had TV commercials like other recent modern drugs, what adverse side effects would be in the commercial (seek medical help if you experience ...) ?
For my decisions, still learning Proverbs 8:1-10 LEB => My child, do not forget my instruction, and may your heart guard my commands. For length of days, years of life, and peace they shall add to you. May loyal love and truth not forsake you; bind them around your neck, write them upon your heart. And you shall find favor and good sense in the eyes of אלהים God and humankind. Trust יהוה Yahweh with all your heart; do not lean toward your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will straighten your paths. Do not be wise in your own eyes; fear יהוה Yahweh and retreat from evil. There shall be healing for your flesh, and refreshment for your body. Honor יהוה Yahweh from your substance, and from the firstfruits of all that will come to you, and your barns shall be full of plenty, and your vats shall burst with new wine.
My heart ❤️ desire is hearing יהוה Yahweh & obeying. Be Holy in all my thoughts, words, and deeds as אלהים God is Holy (my wretched flesh has an ongoing battle with אלהים God's Holiness, which has me crying out for Holy אלהים God's Help many times every day).
Keep Smiling 😊
-
Likewise noted you made no comment about my earlier February 14 comments
At least you had a good reason for not commenting on the chart I presented.
The COVID-19 Mortality Risk report published by CDC on 29 Oct 2021 includes a box "COVID-19 vaccines are safe" A study of 11 million people found no increased risk of death among COVID-19 vaccine recipients.
The evidence is abundant, clear, and convincing that the COVID vaccines are safe (as well as effective... see the chart on which I hope you will now comment).
Another correlated item is Life Insurance payout in 2021 being significantly higher than 2020: (Life Insurance companies had anticipated safe & effective COVID-19 vaccine reducing death rate in 2021, but actual death rate increased significantly)
A lot of people died from COVID in 2021, in large part due to the rise of a more transmissible variant. As the article to which you linked states, "The increase in claims was largely down to the emergence of the Delta variant, twice as transmissible, and more likely to cause hospitalisation than the original coronavirus strain." Insurance companies create business models and set aside assets to deal with such circumstances, but their models weren't sufficient for the way COVID evolved.
Of course, at issue in our current discussion is not how many people died of COVID in any given time period, as sad a subject as that is. At issue in our discussion is whether people who are vaccinated are more, less, or as at risk to die from COVID as are people who are not vaccinated. According to the data, the answer to that question, WITHOUT DOUBT OR RESERVATION, is that the vaccinated are SIGNIFICANTLY LESS at risk to die from COVID then are the unvaccinated.
Now, please comment on the chart with which I began THIS POST.
One data point missing from CDC and State Health departments is the number of people who died within 14 days of receiving a vaccine shot (correlation may be different than causation, but 😭 saddened by reports of many who died suddenly that lack an external death cause).
There is no evidence - NONE - that the COVID vaccines pose anything close to a meaningful risk of death among their recipients.
BTW, "correlation" IS different from "causation."
CDC published Reflections on the 1976 Swine Flu Vaccination Program that includes a couple salient observations:
The success of COVID vaccines is all the evidence one needs to conclude that COVID-19 and the global response to it have little if anything in common with the response to H1N1 more than 50 years ago.
Decades later has mainstream media often repeating CDC mantra "COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective". If COVID-19 vaccines had TV commercials like other recent modern drugs, what adverse side effects would be in the commercial (seek medical help if you experience ...) ?
The evidence of the vaccines' safety and effectiveness is widely available (e.g. in the chart with which I began THIS POST).
In addition to that chart, I ask (again) that you respond to this question about the significance of a 9.1x greater chance of death: If for the next project you took on in life you were offered two (and only two) options - the two options pursuing the identical outcome - and you were told that one option had a 9.1x greater chance of complete failure than the other, would that information figure into your decision as to which option you chose?
And finally, so that we can bring clarity to your point of view on these matters, I ask for you direct answers to the following questions:
1) Here's a table from the CDC reporting COVID case- and death totals and rates for fully vaccinated and unvaccinated persons in 25 jurisdictions over an eight month period in year 2021:
Do the rates of infection and death among the vaccinated and unvaccinated persons presented in that table report that the unvaccinated are more, less, or as likely to contract COVID are are the vaccinated? Do the rates report that the unvaccinated are more, less, or as likely to die from COVID as are the vaccinated? If your answers to those questions are either "more" or "less" likely, please characterize how MUCH more or less likely they are to contract or die from COVID: A "little" more/less likely? "Moderately" more/less likely"? "Significantly" more/less likely?
And here's a chart reflecting the COVID death rate in the U.S. per 100,000 people over a 2-1/2 month period in the second half of last year among the vaccinated (both fully and fully+a booster) and the unvaccinated:
What conclusion do you draw from this chart about the COVID death rate among the unvaccinated compared to the death rate among the vaccinated in the U.S. over those 19 weeks? Was the COVID death rate among the unvaccinated higher, lower, or about the same as the COVID death rate among the vaccinated? If your answer was "higher" or "lower," please characterize how MUCH higher or lower the death rate among the unvaccinated was than the death rate among the vaccinated: A "little" higher/lower"? "Moderately" higher/lower? "Significantly" higher/lower?
Do you have ANY official data that in any substantive manner dispute the findings of the two charts and one table I've now presented to you in this thread?
-
Illinois Department of Public Health Hospitalization Utilization as of 2/15/2022, 11:59 PM shows Total COVID-19 patients in Hospital: 1,683
Illinois Department of Public Health Vaccine Breakthrough shows 9,569 cumulative hospitalizations through 2/16/2022 and 8,563 cumulative hospitalizations through 2/9/2022, which is 1,006 vaccinated people hospitalized for COVID-19 in the past week.
Current COVID-19 breakthrough data: if someone is unvaccinated in Illinois, the prudent action is to stay unvaccinated because 60% of COVID-19 patients in the Hospital are vaccinated (assuming the 1,096 vaccinated people hospitalized for COVID-19 in the past week are still in the hospital).
Current COVID-19 breakthrough data has been removed from the State of Iowa Health reporting. Friday, February 11, 2022 showed 53.7% of Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19 in Iowa, which provides the same prudent action for someone unvaccinated in Iowa to stay unvaccinated.
South Carolina shows for December 16, 2021-January 15, 2022 that 53.0% of the 1,328 Hospitalizations were fully vaccinated. Current COVID-19 breakthrough data provides prudent reason for someone unvaccinated in South Carolina to stay unvaccinated.
Florida's health department is not publishing current COVID-19 breakthrough data.
Current COVID-19 breakthrough data in several states proves COVID-19 vaccines are NOT effective for preventing COVID-19 hospitalization (prudent action for unvaccinated is staying unvaccinated as more patients currently hospitalized are vaccinated).
Pennsylvannia Department of Healt Post-Vaccination Data shows:
Cumulative (Jan 1, 2021 - Jan 4, 2022) Hospitalizations with COVID-19 as the primary diagnosis / cause being 17 % fully vaccinated
38 days ending Feb 11, 2022 Hospitalizations with COVID-19 as the primary diagnosis / cause being 33 % fully vaccinated
Colorado Hospital Data: Vaccination Status shows "64% of Those Currently Hospitalized are Unvaccinated" so 36% in the hospital are vaccinated
Current COVID-19 breakthrough data in a couple states show unvaccinated have 2x greater risk for COVID-19 hospitalization, which is 8x worse than the 16x higher risk published by CDC on February 3, 2022.
@Bill_Coley February 15 Here's a chart from the CDC reporting the COVID-related hospitalization rate throughout the year 2021 for persons age 18+....
What states are being shown in the CDC chart ? Near top of the web page CDC COVID Data Tracker is:
Rates of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 hospitalizations by vaccination status
COVID-NET is a population-based surveillance system that collects data on laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations among children and adults through a network of over 250 acute-care hospitals in 14 states. Additional data on vaccination status for individual cases are collected and available from COVID-NET catchment areas in 12 of the 14 states.
Curious about hospital selection criteria for CDC chart ? (considering current President of the United States wants everyone to "get vaccinated", could hospital selection be showing best scenario for vaccination)
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus February 15 One data point missing from CDC and State Health departments is the number of people who died within 14 days of receiving a vaccine shot (correlation may be different than causation, but 😭 saddened by reports of many who died suddenly that lack an external death cause).
@Bill_Coley February 16 There is no evidence - NONE - that the COVID vaccines pose anything close to a meaningful risk of death among their recipients.
CDC COVID-19 Vaccine Task Force presentation on Oct 21, 2021 shows voluntary adverse data reported to CDC having verification of vaccination causing myocarditis OR myopericarditis (77% known recovery from symptoms at time of report). Slide 18 shows CDC definition and selectivity for verifiying voluntary data.
Keep Smiling 😊
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:
Current COVID-19 breakthrough data: if someone is unvaccinated in Illinois/Iowa/South Carolina/Pennsylvania.....
This is simple math. As the percentage of a state's residents who have been fully vaccinated rises, the percentage of hospitalizations and deaths in that state who are fully vaccinated is also going rise because the vaccinated make up a higher and higher percentage of the population.
- In Illinois, 75% of citizens age 12+ are fully vaccinated (87.3% of persons age 65+, who are among the more vulnerable). The vaccinated outnumber the unvaccinated by 3-to-1.
- In Pennsylvania, 66% are fully vaccinated. There, the difference is 2-to-1.
- In Iowa it's 60.8%. 3-to-2.
- In South Carolina it's 55%
It's not at all surprising that the vaccinated make up increasing percentages of COVID cases. What matters for comparisons are the RATES of death and hospitalization, not the absolute numbers. One example: In Illinois, the vaccinated make up 75% of the population, but accounted for 60% of the one week's new hospitalizations to which your post referred. While the unvaccinated make up 25% of the population yet accounted for 40% of that week's hospitalizations.
So what is the "prudent action" for an unvaccinated resident of Illinois to take? To stay unvaccinated and hence remain part of a group that accounts for a 60% greater share of hospitalizations than its share of the total population would suggest (40% rather than 25%)? Or get vaccinated and become part of the group that accounts for a 20% smaller share of hospitalizations than its share of the total population would suggest (60% rather than 75%)?
Notice that the vaccinated's percentage of hospitalizations in PA is a bit lower than in IL. That makes sense. The unvaccinated's percentage is higher in PA than in IL.
Notice also that the two percentages are lower still in IA and SC, again quite expectedly because the vaccination percentages in IA and SC are lower still.
Higher rates of vaccination mean there are lower percentages of unvaccinated persons, which quite naturally result in higher percentages of cases coming from the vaccinated. Vaccines don't prevent 100% of cases, hospitalizations, or deaths; they reduce them considerably, but do not eliminate them.
NONE of that changes the realities described by the table and two charts I offered in my previous posts.
What states are being shown in the CDC chart ?
Curious about hospital selection criteria for CDC chart ? (considering current President of the United States wants everyone to "get vaccinated", could hospital selection be showing best scenario for vaccination)
According to the CDC, its COVID surveillance area, "comprises 99 counties in the 14 states participating in the Emerging Infections Program (EIP) and the Influenza Hospitalization Surveillance Project (IHSP). Participating states include: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Tennessee, and Utah. COVID-NET covers approximately 10 percent of the U.S. population. The counties covered are located in all 10 Health and Human Services (HHS) regionsexternal icon. The designated COVID-NET surveillance area is generally similar to the U.S. population by demographics; however, the information might not be generalizable to the entire country."
Is there any evidence that the surveillance area was chosen in response to the Biden administration's agenda? No, and you're not likely to find any because the EIP, from which the surveillance area is constructed, was formed in 1995, 13+ years before the Obama-Biden administrations and 25+ years before the Biden administration. In addition, the EIP is selected to be, "roughly representative of the U.S. population on the basis of demographic characteristics such as age, gender, race, and urban residence, as well as health indicators such as population density and percent at or below the poverty level."
That distraction out of the way, I ask YET AGAIN for your comments about the CONTENT of the chart I presented in THIS POST (which can be found HERE; sorry for the bad link previously provided). What conclusions do you draw from that chart about the rates (NOT absolute numbers!) of COVID-related hospitalizations among the vaccinated and unvaccinated in 2021? Were the unvaccinated more, less, or about as likely as the vaccinated to be hospitalized with COVID?
CDC COVID-19 Vaccine Task Force presentation on Oct 21, 2021 shows voluntary adverse data reported to CDC having verification of vaccination causing myocarditis OR myopericarditis (77% known recovery from symptoms at time of report). Slide 18 shows CDC definition and selectivity for verifiying voluntary data.
Please quote from the CDC document where it verifies the vaccination causes myocarditis. I see a correlation demonstrated (via VAERS reports, we must note), but I don't see confirmation or verification. Please quote from the document.
To my calculation, the document counts 2,459 total reported cases of mycarditis among vaccinated persons (either one dose, two doses, or an unknown number of doses), and reports a total of 366,062,239 administered doses, or a myocarditis case percentage of 0.0000671%. If you knew that you had a 99.999933% chance of winning the lottery next week, would you play it? The chances of getting struck by lightning sometime in your life is 0.000654%, about 10 times GREATER than the chances of contracting myocarditis from a COVID vaccine. Does that mean the "prudent action" is for us never to go outside when there are clouds in the sky?
And then there are the table and the other chart I presented in my previous post, to neither of which did you offer even a mention. So YET AGAIN for your direct responses to these questions:
1) About the table: Do the rates (not absolute number) of infection and death among the vaccinated and unvaccinated persons presented in that table report that the unvaccinated are more, less, or as likely to contract COVID as are the vaccinated? Do the rates report that the unvaccinated are more, less, or as likely to die from COVID as are the vaccinated? If your answers to those questions are either "more" or "less" likely, please characterize how MUCH more or less likely they are to contract or die from COVID: A "little" more/less likely? "Moderately" more/less likely"? "Significantly" more/less likely?
2) And about the chart: What conclusion do you draw from that chart about the COVID death rate (not absolute number) among the unvaccinated compared to the death rate among the vaccinated in the U.S. over those 19 weeks? Was the COVID death rate among the unvaccinated higher, lower, or about the same as the COVID death rate among the vaccinated? If your answer was "higher" or "lower," please characterize how MUCH higher or lower the death rate among the unvaccinated was than the death rate among the vaccinated: A "little" higher/lower"? "Moderately" higher/lower? "Significantly" higher/lower?
Do you have ANY official data that in any substantive manner dispute the findings of the two charts and one table I've presented to you in this thread?
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus February 17 Illinois Department of Public Health Hospitalization Utilization as of 2/15/2022, 11:59 PM shows Total COVID-19 patients in Hospital: 1,683
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus February 17 Illinois Department of Public Health Vaccine Breakthrough shows 9,569 cumulative hospitalizations through 2/16/2022 and 8,563 cumulative hospitalizations through 2/9/2022, which is 1,006 vaccinated people hospitalized for COVID-19 in the past week.
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus February 17 Current COVID-19 breakthrough data: if someone is unvaccinated in Illinois, the prudent action is to stay unvaccinated because 60% of COVID-19 patients in the Hospital are vaccinated (assuming the 1,096 vaccinated people hospitalized for COVID-19 in the past week are still in the hospital).
@Bill_Coley February 17 In Illinois, 75% of citizens age 12+ are fully vaccinated . The vaccinated outnumber the unvaccinated by 3-to-1.
Currect COVID-19 risk factor in Illinois for unvaccinated to be hospitalized is 1.6x = (1,683 - 1,096) / (1,096 / 3) = 587 unvaccinated / 365.333 vaccinated = 1.6x that is an order of magnitude worse than the CDC published risk factor of 16x for unvaccinated to be hospitalized compared to vaccinated.
Simply wonder about CDC's definitions of "safe" and "effective" for COVID-19 vaccines ?
Notably missing from CDC and Department of Health information about post-vaccination is all cause mortality comparison. If COVID-19 vaccines are truly safe, then all cause mortality should have nothing significant. Perplexed by data being hidden from public view, especially all cause mortality within 14 days of receiving a COVID-19 "vaccine" (quotes show COVID-19 variant definition of "vaccine" lacks endurance for sickness and death protection over many months).
@Bill_Coley February 17 Do you have ANY official data that in any substantive manner dispute the findings of the two charts and one table I've presented to you in this thread?
Have seen official data (e.g. California Department of Health unvaccinated & vaccinated) that looks a lot like CDC data in 2021, but risks & rates calculated using 2021 data significantly do not match 2022 official data changes. What is the reason for a booster jab that may be "helpful" for four months ? (noticing several official data comparisons of boosted vaccinated to unvaccinated, which leaves out original vaccinated from comparison)
Keep Smiling 😊
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:
Currect COVID-19 risk factor in Illinois for unvaccinated to be hospitalized is 1.6x = (1,683 - 1,096) / (1,096 / 3) = 587 unvaccinated / 365.333 vaccinated = 1.6x that is an order of magnitude worse than the CDC published risk factor of 16x for unvaccinated to be hospitalized compared to vaccinated.
Simply wonder about CDC's definitions of "safe" and "effective" for COVID-19 vaccines ?
It's simply not possible for me to have a productive exchange of views with you on this or any other issue when you refuse to address my questions directly:
- I asked you about the chart found at the top of THIS POST in THIS POST, THIS POST, AND THIS POST, each time receiving no response from you.
- I asked you about the table and chart found in THIS POST a second time in THIS POST, also without your response.
- And in my post before this one I asked you to quote from the CDC document that you claimed declared a causal connection between COVID vaccinations and myocarditis, again without response from you.
So I am backing away from this exchange with you. If there comes a time when you're willing to address my questions and to do so directly, please say so in a post and I will return to the exchange, at least for long enough to determine whether you're actually willing to address my questions.
-
@Bill_Coley @Bill_ColeyFebruary 22 I asked you about the chart found at the top of THIS POST in THIS POST , THIS POST , AND THIS POST , each time receiving no response from you.
Simple answer is No for official data in the U.S.A. available for public viewing that disputes 2021 data shown in the chart. Please provide official data that splits "unvaccinated" into people who choose to avoid "vaccine" and those who received "vaccine" shot(s). CDC greater risk comparison between "unvaccinated" and "vaccinated" currently has adverse "vaccine" effects within 14 days of receiving a shot combined with those who choose to avoid vaccination. Hence, CDC risk comparison is misleading along with me being able to reach a definitive conclusion about CDC charts and tables due to official data hidden from public scrutiny.
Noticed URL for the last THIS POST is the same as your February 17 post that had my reply on February 21
@Bill_Coley February 17 Do you have ANY official data that in any substantive manner dispute the findings of the two charts and one table I've presented to you in this thread?
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus February 21 Have seen official data (e.g. California Department of Health unvaccinated & vaccinated) that looks a lot like CDC data in 2021, but risks & rates calculated using 2021 data significantly do not match 2022 official data changes. What is the reason for a booster jab that may be "helpful" for four months ? (noticing several official data comparisons of boosted vaccinated to unvaccinated, which leaves out original vaccinated from comparison)
Repeating: What is the reason for a booster jab that may be "helpful" for four months ?
Keep Smiling 😊
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:
Simple answer is No for official data in the U.S.A. available for public viewing that disputes 2021 data shown in the chart. Please provide official data that splits "unvaccinated" into people who choose to avoid "vaccine" and those who received "vaccine" shot(s). CDC greater risk comparison between "unvaccinated" and "vaccinated" currently has adverse "vaccine" effects within 14 days of receiving a shot combined with those who choose to avoid vaccination. Hence, CDC risk comparison is misleading along with me being able to reach a definitive conclusion about CDC charts and tables due to official data hidden from public scrutiny.
The "unvaccinated" obviously cannot be "split" into people who "avoid" the vaccine and those who receive the vaccine because, by definition, those who receive the vaccine are no longer "unvaccinated."
If the purported "adverse" reactions post-vaccination to which you refer are those reported in the VAERS database, which is co-managed by the CDC and the FDA, then there is no mixing of unvaccinated with the vaccinated. As the VAERS website reports,
"Established in 1990, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is a national early warning system to detect possible safety problems in U.S.-licensed vaccines. VAERS is co-managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). VAERS accepts and analyzes reports of adverse events (possible side effects) after a person has received a vaccination. Anyone can report an adverse event to VAERS. Healthcare professionals are required to report certain adverse events and vaccine manufacturers are required to report all adverse events that come to their attention."
The only mixing of data in such a system would arise were unvaccinated persons (or on their behalf, those who cared for them) to report adverse reactions to vaccines they hadn't received. If you have another source of data mixing in mind, please provide a link to it.
As for the conclusion of your response, I didn't ask whether you had reservations about the chart, or whether it reflected or failed to reflect "hidden" data. I asked, according to the chart, were the unvaccinated more, less, or about as likely as the vaccinated to be hospitalized with COVID? I ask that question YET AGAIN.
Then there were the questions I asked about the table and chart in THIS POST, questions to which your latest post provides no response whatsoever.
And for good measure, in THIS POST and its successor I asked you to quote from the CDC document that you claimed declared a causal connection between COVID vaccinations and myocarditis. I now make that request YET AGAIN.
Have seen official data (e.g. California Department of Health unvaccinated & vaccinated) that looks a lot like CDC data in 2021, but risks & rates calculated using 2021 data significantly do not match 2022 official data changes. What is the reason for a booster jab that may be "helpful" for four months ? (noticing several official data comparisons of boosted vaccinated to unvaccinated, which leaves out original vaccinated from comparison)
Where does your "four months" quoted reference come from? Please provide a link.
Boosters strengthen and prolong recipients' capacity to avoid serious illness, hospitalization, and death. Such prolongation is clearly needed to lessen the impact of variants that develop months or years into a pandemic, as has been the case with COVID. Had there been no Delta or Omicron variant, chances are boosters would not have been needed.
It's immunology and virology 101 to say that the larger the number of people who don't get vaccinated, the more opportunities a virus has to spread. The more a virus spreads, the more chances it has to mutate (i.e. to create variants). The more variants are created, the longer vaccines are usually needed. And the longer vaccines are needed, the more likely boosters will be "helpful."
In data I've seen, the categories refer to the unvaccinated, the "fully vaccinated," and the fully vaccinated who have received a booster.
-
Canada has an official health database that shows cumulative numbers in Table 2 => https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/epidemiological-summary-covid-19-cases.html with four vaccination categories: "Cases not yet protected", "Partially vaccinated", "Fully vaccinated", & "Fully vaccinated with an additional dose" (mutually exclusive)
Table 2 as of February 13, 2022
Table 2 as of February 20, 2022
Comparing cumulative (since December 14, 2020) Unvaccinated with sum of four vaccination categories in Canada as of February 20, 2022 shows females receiving vaccine shot(s) are 16 % more likely to get sick (515,274 cases) from Covid-19 than Unvaccinated (445,365 cases).
Comparing weekly delta of Unvaccinated with sum of four vaccination categories in Canada shows Covid-19 deaths were 212 % more likely for jabbed (197) compared to Unvaccinated (93). Hospitalization was 225 % more likely for jabbed (917) compared to Unvaccinated (407).
What is "effective" for COVID-19 vaccines ?
Peer reviewed journal article in Current Issues in Molecular Biology (CIMB) was published on 25 February 2022:
Pfizer's mRNA "vaccine" can be "reverse-transcribed and integrated into the genome of human cells" (within a few hours of exposure).
In light of Canadian official health data and CIMB article, sadly (& disappointedly) wonder how many CDC "Facts" are factually in error ?
Wonder if a modern addendum to George Orwell's 1984 would have Big Brother saying on TV: "COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective"
@Bill_Coley February 22 Where does your "four months" quoted reference come from? Please provide a link.
Suggest searching internet for: Fauci booster four months
Keep Smiing 😊
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
