Covid 19 Part XXXV-956,720 ROI (5,952 deaths) 452,946 NI (3,002 deaths) (08/01) Read OP

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120151945#Comment_120151945

You link dumped a Youtube video. Nobody has the time to watch all such linked videos and 99 times out of 100 they are garbage or a proper article would be linked.

Similarly if you rely on the BBC you will have a more reliable guide to the facts. Not infallible but right far far more often than wrong.

Did you read the rebuttal?

https://osr.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/correspondence/ed-humpherson-to-norman-fenton-martin-neil-clare-craig-and-scott-mclachlan-ons-deaths-by-vaccination-status-statistics/

They reject pretty much all the points put to them especially the key point re: underestimating deaths in the unvaccinated.

They acknowledge gaps in the data as they are only tracking this cohort:

The publication uses data from the Public Health Data Asset (PHDA), which combines data from the 2011 census and the General Practice Extraction Service (GPES). For an individual to be included in the PHDA, they must have responded to the 2011 census and be presently registered with a GP. Those missing from the PHDA dataset are therefore not missing at random, and they are more likely to fall under one or more of the following categories:

• Younger in age
• Born outside of the UK
• Unvaccinated (as it is more difficult to obtain a COVID-19 vaccination without being registered with a GP)

Based on this gap they recommend the vaccine surveillance report - that report is clear on the evidence for vaccine safety and effectiveness.

But what the ONS data does show is that among UK residents registered with a GP and in the 2011 census, all cause mortality was significantly lower for vaccinated v unvaccinated.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120153306#Comment_120153306

Yes, it's well known that something like an energy crisis can have an impact, the current one is no exception.

https://www.ft.com/content/bbb4ee56-f846-4aa3-8233-c28924890fee

The constant swirl of cold and damp can make for an early grave. More people expire in the winter than in warmer months due to an increase in heart attacks, stroke, respiratory disease (including Covid), flu, falls and hypothermia. The approaching change of season coupled with the prospect of soaring energy costs prompted researchers to warn last week of an impending “public health and humanitarian crisis” as people struggle to heat their homes. Sir Michael Marmot, a health equity researcher at University College London, together with paediatricians Ian Sinha and Alice Lee at Alder Hey Children’s Hospital in Liverpool, wrote in the British Medical Journal that the health consequences will be felt not just by the elderly but also by the young, whose maturing respiratory systems may be impaired for life."

walus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120153272#Comment_120153272

The absence of evidence is not an evidence of absence.

Have you got evidence that vaccines are not a contributory factor? And I mean a study looking into root causes of those deaths and not yet another link to an article from one of the news outlets from 2 years ago stating that vaccines are safe and effective.

AlmightyCushion

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120154390#Comment_120154390

Trying to prove a negative like you are asking is very difficult. For example, you can't prove that there aren't people out there who can turn themselves into a duck. We have no evidence that there are people who can turn themselves into a duck and there have never been any recorded sightings or incidences of people turning themselves into a duck which would indicate that there aren't people who can turn themselves into a duck. So from that we can conclude that it isn't possible however we can't prove it.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120154390#Comment_120154390

What evidence have you got that they are?

In the absence of that, you are into "just asking questions" if not scaremongering territory, when it is done without foundation.

That which is stated without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

In this case there is evidence to the contrary re: vaccine safety.

For one thing, there is no correlation between vaccine rates and excess deaths consistent across countries.

There are multiple layers of monitoring going on. It never stopped.

Unexplained deaths would require post mortems. No safety signals have been detected that show any links between vaccination and increased excess deaths.

As proof of the active monitoring - this is a recent safety signal alert however further analysis indicates the risk is either extremely low OR non-existent.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/extensive-review-affirms-safety-covid-235237457.html

This is a recent study looking at deaths in Qatar 30 days post vaccination (in 2021 and 2022) and concluded "deaths attributable to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are extremely rare and lower than the overall crude mortality rate in Qatar."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-35653-z

Dr Alison Cave, Chief Safety Office for the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), told Reuters via email: “Following a careful assessment of the available data, we concluded that the evidence does not support an association between the COVID-19 vaccines and an increased risk of cardiac related death. This conclusion has been supported by the independent Commission on Human Medicines’ COVID-19 Vaccine expert advisory group.”

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-vaccines-excessdeaths/fact-check-no-evidence-covid-19-mrna-vaccines-are-significant-contributing-factor-to-uks-30000-excess-cardiovascular-deaths-idUSL1N3490M3

This study tracked vaccination recipients in 2021 and "found that COVID-19 vaccine recipients had lower non-COVID-19 mortality than did unvaccinated persons." It's not a news article, they're not just looking at COVID deaths.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X22015614

walus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120154716#Comment_120154716

The point I'm trying to get to is that neither can be proven for definite. To confirm or disconfirm the role of vaccine as a contributor to an unexpected excess deaths a formal inquiry should be conducted and scientific methods be used to establish facts.

It should be of interest of everybody involved to get this done. The public, the health officials and more importantly - pharmaceutical companies.

The interesting thing about excess deaths is that it happens in majority of western countries and it happens across all age groups, with younger group < 44 years of age as one that is more affected than 45+. There have been attempts to appease public in those countries with varying sets of plausible reasons, including local factors. However most of those reasons do not seat well with the younger, more affected, cohort (i.e. heat waves, aging population etc.). There are other systemic factors at play that are common to all countries that are not being discussed the way they should. Taking the vaccines out of the equation would be a natural thing to do, so that we could get to the bottom of it.

Edit: source - https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/.

2018 - year with bad flu and heatwaves

What is not helping currently is a lack of interest and a total lack of action from the authorities to investigate it. Especially that severe adverse effects of vaccines have been documented (i.e. heart inflammation) and myocarditis is known to be linked to about 20% of sudden death syndrome in young adults. It is something that is simply more dangerous for younger people. In addition to that majority of the causes of excess deaths are linked to cardiovascular diseases.

Therefore there is an argument for some to claim that vaccines may be a contributory factor, and I can see why as it is easy to establish that correlation. Also, I do not see how we can dismiss vaccines without a proper evidence. Without a solid proof, it should be treated as a possibility. I mean, do we have long term safety data that includes multiple jabs?

I understand that while this possibility may be small we should know quantitatively what it is at this point. In my opinion there is no chance that vaccines have caused 0 deaths, just as there is no chance that they are to blame for all the excess deaths. People are dying due to unknown reasons, and the enquiry should establish how much to that is contributed by vaccines, so that we can get to the bottom of this and prevent those deaths.

I mean the world has stopped when people started dying of covid. Now they are dying of something else, and hardly anybody seems to be bothered. Strange to say the least.

Lastly, as for the duck analogy thing, the fact there is no evidence of an effect is quite different to saying that there is no effect. I thought, that is something that needs no explanation.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120155420#Comment_120155420

These vaccines have been taken by the vast majority of the world's population, there are many monitoring, regulatory and safety systems in place. Apart from very rare adverse effects, there are no signs or evidence these vaccines (or others) are behind recent excess deaths.

There is however evidence that anti-vax groups, grifters, charlatans and individuals are systematically attempting to portray them as dangerous

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120154716#Comment_120154716

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

Johnboy1951

We can now add eggs to the possible causes of a portion of those sudden deaths that some are blaming on the jabs

https://newspunch.com/scientists-warn-eggs-are-causing-thousands-of-people-to-suddenly-form-blood-clots/amp/

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120156355#Comment_120156355

You added it.

A small study found consuming choline in foods is generally fine, but there could be a higher risk of blood clot if taking supplements of it.

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/1554078/blood-clot-risks-eggs-meats-choline

US3

There's no evidence needed to blame the deaths on eggs (😂) , climate change, fuel shortage, getting out of bed to quick in the morning but if you add 1 + 1 and get 2 you need hard evidence

The main reason for excess deaths is that we acted incredibly irresponsible for 2 years by cancelling all kinds of screenings and treatments and terrifying the population away from medical care.

Also, obesity was a big concern before COVID but now we've lots of the population working from home and while lots have discipline, there are plenty rolling out of bed at 8:55am who could do with being forced to walk 10 - 15 mins to a bus stop.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120155420#Comment_120155420

You're setting expectations that cannot be met based on a flawed premise.

If you think no one cares about the excess deaths, not even sure why you need to bring vaccines into it? Regardless of vaccines, either you do or don't think it is something worthy of investigation.

Also, to state no one is interested\investigating, is without foundation. Why do you think UK ONS are tracking this data? What do you think organisations such as UK Health Security Agency (Public Health England) etc do?

What you're missing is the level of active monitoring of the vaccine rollout programme that is going on. Of all the reasons floated for excess deaths, if it was vaccines we would already know it, or have the best chance of knowing it, due to the level of studies and monitoring going on.

What makes you think they are not already using scientific methods or dealing in facts in that monitoring?

Can the extent of the role of vaccines be proven for definite to the standard you are demanding? How would that be done?

We must assume an autopsy cannot determine whether eg a cardiac related death is due to covid\long covid, vaccination, or some other factor.

Therefore how would such an enquiry proceed to establish how many deaths are attributable to vaccination?

They would refer back to all the studies cited on this thread, showing the very low risk of serious adverse events, showing a rare risk of post vaccination myocarditis in most cases mild versus showing the higher relative risk of covid, showing significant raised all cause mortality risk post covid infection.

How many of the fatalities are due to e.g. people not being put on meds when needed or having procedures done.

How many of the fatalities are due to e.g. slower ambulance responses

How many of the fatalities are due to e.g. slower treatment time in A&E

They would not be able to deal in certainties, but would have to make expert judgments based on imperfect real world data of how to attribute the excess deaths.

The same kinds of expert judgments that are being made now, stating vaccines are safe (an acceptable safety profile for a medicine) and that the risk of serious adverse events is rare and therefore deemed to be a negligible factor in excess deaths.

The people who won't accept those judgments now won't accept them from such an enquiry.

Is it possible vaccines are playing a role? Yes, but how can you definitely prove they are i.e. a negative? SO is that a useful question?

The real question is - It is plausible vaccines are playing any kind of significant role? Based on all the available data and studies - no.

ceadaoin.

showing a rare risk of post vaccination myocarditis in most cases mild versus showing the higher relative risk of covid, 

Yeah it's just a bit of "mild" permanent and irreperable heart damage. I'm sure this must be the only person out of all the millions of healthy young people who received an unnecessary (for them) vaccine.

https://journals.lww.com/pidj/fulltext/9900/ventricular_arrhythmia_and_covid_19.319.aspx

For young men under 40, the risk of myocarditis is higher after vaccination than it is after covid, and the risk is even higher in adolescents, particularly after moderna, which is why many countries stopped offering it to young people. A lot of young people will be walking around with heart damage and probably don't even know about it

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.122.059970

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120157087#Comment_120157087

That's one isolated case report, to which the report even states:

It should be noted that this patient’s symptoms and arrhythmia could have been caused by unknown factors unrelated to C-VAM. This is a limitation of case reports. 

Irreparable damage? The report appears to contradict you:

The patient was restricted from all sports due to the high risk of sudden cardiac death. Repeat exercise stress test one year after initial presentation was normal. Follow-up cMRI 1 year after admission showed stable intensity of subepicardial delayed gadolinium enhancement with no evidence of ongoing myocardial edema (Fig. 1). These findings were consistent with fibrosis secondary to prior myocarditis and the patient’s sports restriction was lifted.

Whereas...

Dr Alison Cave, Chief Safety Office for the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), told Reuters via email: “Following a careful assessment of the available data, we concluded that the evidence does not support an association between the COVID-19 vaccines and an increased risk of cardiac related death. This conclusion has been supported by the independent Commission on Human Medicines’ COVID-19 Vaccine expert advisory group.”

There is a rare risk of myocarditis post vaccination, most cases are mild. I stand over those comments and they are supported by all the available evidence.

Any statements to the contrary, without foundation, are mere speculation if not misinformation or scaremongering.

ceadaoin.

Irreparable damage? The report appears to contradict you:

Does it though? It says "these findings were consistent with fibrosis secondary to prior myocarditis". I'm sure you know that fibrosis is damage and unlike other organs, the heart cannot repair itself. Unable to repair = irreparable. So yes, he has irreparable damage which may lead to a risk of heart failure

They also come to the conclusions that "This case describes a patient with COVID-19 vaccine-associated myocarditis who had ventricular tachycardia up to 6 months after initial diagnosis." . But sure latch on to the previous disclaimer, however unlikely.

hometruths

It seems that the following is generally accepted irrespective of your views on the vaccines:

a) there is a proven risk of myocarditis/heart inflammation from covid vaccines

b) that risk is proven to be elevated further in young people

c) myocarditis/heart inflammation can be fatal

d) there is an ongoing elevated level of excess deaths in young people since sometime last year

None of the above is in dispute.

Yet many here think it is totally implausible that any of these young people are dying from vaccine related heart problems.

Not only that, they think the cold weather/hot weather/fuel crisis etc etc are all totally plausible explanations for the elevated level of excess deaths in young people.

No matter how hard I try, I struggle to understand the logic here.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120157861#Comment_120157861

You have deliberately left out a crucial points in a bid to overstate the merits of your premise as well as presenting a strawman case.

Namely that the established risk is extremely rare.

And - who said it was implausible that 'any' young people have died as a results of vaccine related heart problems?

Well? It forms part of your premise.

What is said is that the premise re vaccines playing a non negligible role in the excess cardiac deaths is implausible because:

The risk has been looked into and is extremely rare.

And is less than the risk post covid infection.

"In the 1–28 days following the first dose of the ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccine, an extra two (95% CI 0, 3), one (95%CI 0, 2) and six (95% CI 2, 8) myocarditis events per 1 million exposed would be anticipated, respectively. In the 1–28 days following the second dose of mRNA-1273, an extra ten (95% CI 7, 11) myocarditis events per 1 million persons would be anticipated. This compares with an extra 40 (95% CI 38, 41) myocarditis events per 1 million in the 1–28 days following a SARS-CoV-2 positive test."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01630-0

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120157938#Comment_120157938

I have just simplified down to four key points that are not in dispute.

There is a risk of myocarditis.

That risk is elevated in young people.

I might add that all those citing the weather as a plausible explanation, rarely point out that a young persons's risk of dying from inclement weather is extremely rare. There is a risk no doubt, but it is extremely rare.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120157861#Comment_120157861

There's a higher risk of myocarditis from Covid. There doesn't seem to be an equivalent amount of concern about that.

There's no evidence that the excess deaths are linked to the vaccines.

As mentioned, there is evidence that there are persistent attempts on social media to link deaths to vaccines.

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-vaccines-excessdeaths/fact-check-no-evidence-covid-19-mrna-vaccines-are-significant-contributing-factor-to-uks-30000-excess-cardiovascular-deaths-idUSL1N3490M3

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2023/01/23/fact-check-false-claim-covid-19-vaccines-have-caused-118-000-deaths-uk-kids-england-sean-feucht/10997754002/

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/evidence-covid-19-vaccines-dont-increase-risk-death-contrary-claim-financier-edward-dowd/

Site here documenting them (note the sheer volume)

https://publichealthcollaborative.org/misinformation-alerts/

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120157951#Comment_120157951

Over simplified to the extent that it deliberately creates a misleading premise which I reject.

Can you show us where heatwaves were used to explain excess deaths in young people specifically?

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120157962#Comment_120157962

There's a higher risk of myocarditis from Covid. There doesn't seem to be an equivalent amount of concern about that.

And again, I didn't mention that because I deliberately simplified to things that are not in dispute. That was the point.

Conclusions

Cardiovascular abnormalities are no more common in seropositive versus seronegative otherwise healthy, workforce representative individuals 6 months post–mild severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 infection.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1936878X21003569

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120157938#Comment_120157938

And - who said it was implausible that 'any' young people have died as a results of vaccine related heart problems?

Ok fair enough, that has not been specifically claimed, merely implied (in my interpretation).

To clarify are you saying that you do think it is plausible that some of the excess deaths in young people are as a result of vaccine related heart problems?

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120158030#Comment_120158030

Was it implied? You continually misrepresent the opposing view on the thread. It wasnt specifically claimed so as you are completely unable to back up claim your implication is without foundation.

It cannot be ruled out that a very small number of deaths may be related to extremely rare post vaccination side effects.

But based on the available evidence, the numbers are negligible wrt to increase in excess deaths and they are not plausible as a factor in explaining the numbers.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120158078#Comment_120158078

So if you agree it is plausible that vaccines could cause a (small) number of these deaths in young people, do you think that number is likely to be higher or lower than the excess deaths in young people caused by the weather?

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120158120#Comment_120158120

Correction - a very small number.

I would need to see more information on weather extremes and mortality impact on young people specifically.

Its role with older demographics is established.

Anecdotally we are all aware of small numbers of tragic deaths eg inexperienced water related tragedies in heatwaves with children and young adults.

But I am not aware of studies which would show 'indirect' effects of numbers which could help explain the excess death numbers.

So any answer to the specific question would be pointless at this time.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120158188#Comment_120158188

Sounds a lot like there is no evidence the hot or cold weather is a factor either so. Odd that so many cite it though.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120158216#Comment_120158216

I said I havent seen such evidence that does not mean such evidence doesnt exist / informs those citations.

Odd that you claim so many cite it yet despite being asked have been unable to point to specific instances.

Perhaps you should ask the people citing it. With reference to their posts.

It would estabish you arent just strawmanning / misrepresenting the view you are challenging.

hometruths

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120158247#Comment_120158247

You replied to my post about it, hence why I am discussing it with you. I have no problem if you don't wish to discuss it further.

US3

Where were all these excess deaths in 2013 and 2018 and 1995, the three hottest summers on record by some distance.