Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

We're back to VAERS/Yellowcard reports again.

To explain this (for the 50th time), if there was a report card for an adverse effect within 4 weeks of e.g. eating mackerel, there would be millions of reports.

That's how VAERs, Yellowcard, etc works. Experts analyse the reports to see if there are any variations outside the expected results.

No they don't. This is a statement of fact that is without foundation. Completely blatant medical misinformation.

There is no placebo for respiratory viruses that even begins to approach the effectiveness of covid vaccines at preventing hospitalisation and death.

And you talk about "you got to believe". You have absolutely no evidence to support your statement re: placebos. When it is obvious your position on vaccines is not evidence based.

The effectiveness of vaccination versus hospitalisation is borne out in study after study, country after country. This is but one of them. The effectiveness wanes but 64% is significant protection - where's your placebo that trumps that?

 For the outcome of severe COVID-19, vaccine effectiveness waned from 89% (82 to 93; p<0·001) at 15–30 days to 64% (44 to 77; p<0·001) from day 121 onwards.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67362200089-7/fulltext

Yes I know about the placebo effect which is why I understand the misinformation and half truths in your post. The placebo effect is a lot more nuanced and complicated than that short summary you have listed, and the effect varies dramatically depending on the type of disease.

Someone who got the placebo (or vaccine) could have a heart attack or medical issue manifest in the trial period post injection. That gets reported. Doesn't mean there's any connection to the injection. And there are rare cases of injuries received from injection - or any substance, placebo or medicine or anything.

Sure why not get rid of all medicines then and rely entirely on the placebo effect if they "tend to have to same effect"??? Would you say "placebo tends to have the same effect as antibiotics"???

So how about reading your own posts - this was your quote: "Anyway, placebo tends to have the same effect."

And the studies cited aren't talking about people who 'think' they were saved from hospitalization. But actual hospitalization records based on vaccination status.

So no they don't "tend to have the same effect", and to suggest the effectiveness of the vaccination is comparable in that way to placebo is medical misinformation without foundation or merit.

My point stands:

The effectiveness of vaccination versus hospitalisation is borne out in study after study, country after country. This is but one of them. The effectiveness wanes but 64% is significant protection - where's your placebo that trumps that?

This is the reality:

The effectiveness of vaccination versus hospitalisation is borne out in study after study, country after country. This is but one of them. The effectiveness wanes but 64% is significant protection - where's your placebo that trumps that?

Which you have pointedly failed to challenge with evidence, except with a smokescreen about placebos. Those results are proof positive the vaccines are significantly effective at preventing hospitalisation and death and this is not a manifestation of a mere placebo effect.

It worked for some and didn't work for others - that vague remark could be said about any medicine. The metric is how many people did it work for - and the figures established in such studies as the below show a significant protection effect from the vaccine, entirely separate to, and dwarfing any supposed placebo effect.

To try to dismiss that away as 'placebo effect' is completely without foundation and if you are making a statement of fact that the vaccine's effectiveness is down to placebo effect that is without question medical misinformation.

Vaccination had a real, measurable effect at reducing hospitalisations entirely refuting your claim in post #12436

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67362200089-7/fulltext

So in Switzerland, their Federal Office of Public Health now say that “no COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for spring/summer 2023.” And any doctor who does administer COVID injections will now be liable for any damage caused by the shots.

While in the land of the free. after 1,120 days of slowing the spread, Biden has finally declared the national Covid emergency “over.”

Does that mean that as there's no longer an emergency, the experimental COVID Shots will now have there "Emergency Use Authorisation" removed?

Not sure which country you are living in, but in Ireland \ EU they are not emergency.

Your references to Switzerland appears to contain several incorrect statements.

If a doctor recommends that you receive the COVID-19 vaccine because you are considered “high risk”, it will be provided free of charge, and covered by compulsory health insurance. In addition, such recommended COVID-19 vaccination will continue to be covered by subsidiary liability protection by the federal government... the doctor’s liability in vaccinating people against COVID-19 is no different from any other medical procedure or vaccination.

And the vaccines are not 'experimental' full stop, statement of fact made without foundation as per

Guessing same will have to apply in Europe if a similar end to the COVID "Emergency" were to be declared.

The EU's equivalent Conditional Marketing Authorisation (CMA) will also come to an end.

Good luck getting approval, with the ongoing Pfizer test data being released. (The data they had got a court order to hide for 75 years), Moderna data starts coming out next month. Will take more than a fact check statement from a PR company (Rauters) to hide the fraud.

Full FDA approval has already been given for the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines