Covid-19 miscellany

[ZiprHead]

I just saw this on that Florida study:

I've been thinking more about the inconsistencies in the Florida study. On reviewing it yet again, there seems evidence that the original paper included data on covid-19 deaths, not just vaccine risks. And then the paper was stripped of the covid-19 deaths but left tell-tale signs of the original. And it starts with the title and objective:

Title:

Quote:
Exploring the relationship between all-cause and cardiac-related mortality following COVID-19 vaccination or infection in Florida residents: a self-controlled case series study

Objective:

Quote:
To evaluate the risks of all-cause and cardiac-related mortality following COVID-19 vaccination.

Where's the covid-19 mortality in that objective? It isn't there. And the data set specifically excluded anyone with a documented covid-19 infection.

Quote:
Individuals were excluded if they (1) had a documented COVID-19 infection, (2) experienced a COVID-19 associated death, (3) received a booster, or (4) received their last COVID-19 vaccination after December 8, 2021 (to ensure each individual had the 25-week follow-up period to experience the event of interest).

Now look at the Table 1 description:

Quote:
Table 1: Relative incidence following COVID-19 vaccination or infection for all cause and cardiac-related deaths during the risk period vs baseline period

Really? How did they do that after excluding everyone with a covid-19 infection?

Oh, wait. Let's look at what's actually in the table:

Quote:
COVID-19 vaccination

Yep. Nothing about infections. Nor anything in the next tables. So lets look at the "Discussion" section.

Quote:
Risk for both all-cause and cardiac-related deaths was substantially higher 28 days following COVID-19 infection. The risk associated with mRNA vaccination should be weighed against the risk associated with COVID-19 infection.

Well, golly gee. No kidding. So they did look at covid-19 deaths in a 4 week period following infection. And the Table 1 heading indicates the actual data was part of Table 1. But it wasn't.

This sure smells like a study that originally included data on both benefits and risks then they removed the benefits. But sloppily leaving traces of the original. Why would they do that? On Florida's Surgeon General's orders?

 

[TSwizzle]

Jeezus, even Teh Gruaniad has woken up to the dangers of the emergency powers put into the hands of authoritarians;

Boris Johnson’s Covid laws took away our rights with flick of a pen. Don’t let that happen again. These were probably the strangest and most extraordinary laws in England’s history, imposing previously unimaginable restrictions on our social lives, bringing into the realm of the criminal law areas of life – where we could worship, when we could leave home, even who we could hug – that had previously been purely a matter of personal choice. The Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 allowed for ministers to enact the coronavirus regulations with almost no parliamentary scrutiny. Of 109 lockdown laws, only eight were considered by parliament before coming into force, usually only a day before. The rest became law (literally) as soon as Matt Hancock, the then health secretary, put his signature at the bottom of the page. Also troubling was the constant refrain that the government was “following the science”, by which it meant its scientific advisory group, Sage. But decisions were ultimately taken in the extremely powerful but opaque Covid-19 cabinet committees, presided over by four ministers – Boris Johnson, Rishi Sunak, Matt Hancock and Michael Gove. No minutes were released and no explanation offered of how decisions were made. This was the most powerful government committee since the second world war, but received no scrutiny. Why does this matter now? Because the pandemic – and the ease with which ancient freedoms such as the right to protest, to worship, to see our families, were removed essentially by decisions of a tiny group of ministers – should be a wake-up call. It is only a matter of time before a new crisis will arise – either connected to Covid-19, to another virus or to another kind of emergency altogether.

Teh Gruaniad

"following the science" my arse.

Never again.

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I just saw this on that Florida study:

I've been thinking more about the inconsistencies in the Florida study. On reviewing it yet again, there seems evidence that the original paper included data on covid-19 deaths, not just vaccine risks. And then the paper was stripped of the covid-19 deaths but left tell-tale signs of the original. And it starts with the title and objective:

My first reaction to seeing the Florida "study" was that it looked like typical undiagnosed Covid deaths.

Since then I have learned that it is an extremely unusual "study" in that it has no authors.

It looks very much like some anti-vax whacko played with the numbers until they found something that would "support" their position if you didn't look too carefully. Nobody's willing to stand by the "science", that should be enough right there to tell you there's a big problem with it.

(Note that you do not need to have academic credentials to publish useful research. Consider the paper "Monsters are people too", a solution to a problem long thought insoluble--and published by a 12 year old. Obviously, they had some assistance in doing it but the 12 year old is the one that did the work and answered the question.)

 

[repoman]

Maybe there will a Boston Strain soon

 

[steve_bank]

Got my flu and COVID shots.

So far so good, no visible mutations.

My building has 140 apartments. This is the third time someone came in to vaccinate us.

Previously there was a high turnout.This time around 15 people showed up.

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[repoman]

So I saw a claim that there is a desire to put to covid vaccine into the childhood schedule to satisfy a condition in a 1986 law that would then keep the vaccine makers out of liability. Keeping them out of the liability as it goes from EUA non liability to a similar condition from the 1986 law.

What level of truth, if any, does this assertion have?

 

[TSwizzle]

Two people in our office tested positive for covid over the weekend. First case we've had for a while.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Maybe there will a Boston Strain soon

Well, the Boston (University) Strain would be a combo of Covid Classic and Omicron, which very doubtedly would be capable of being competitive in the open virus market, even if it managed to escape due to most Americans being vaccinated or already exposed to the virus. But thanks for the misinformation. Just can't get enough of that shit from your posts.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Jebus... I remember when he was funny. Scott Adams has just gone full quasi Dennis Miller/Joe Rogan.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So I saw a claim that there is a desire to put to covid vaccine into the childhood schedule to satisfy a condition in a 1986 law that would then keep the vaccine makers out of liability. Keeping them out of the liability as it goes from EUA non liability to a similar condition from the 1986 law.

What level of truth, if any, does this assertion have?

No idea but it would be reasonable.

The problem is there are a lot of claims of vaccine harm, but they're almost all utterly bogus. In cases where it can't be proven who is right juries all too often see injured person, deep pockets that were involved and skip over the lack of evidence that said deep pockets actually caused any harm. Thus we moved to a system where medical people decide whether the vaccine did harm rather than juries.

Look at the persistent claims that vaccines cause autism--never mind that this has been solidly debunked. Or look at what happened to DOW Corning--got destroyed by a liability lawsuit over breast implants, but by the time the science was in it turns out the main part of the claim was based on nothing. There were legitimate cases due to ruptures, but if anything the women with implants were less likely to have the alleged issues than the ones without.

 

[Jarhyn]

So I saw a claim that there is a desire to put to covid vaccine into the childhood schedule to satisfy a condition in a 1986 law that would then keep the vaccine makers out of liability. Keeping them out of the liability as it goes from EUA non liability to a similar condition from the 1986 law.

What level of truth, if any, does this assertion have?

No idea but it would be reasonable.

The problem is there are a lot of claims of vaccine harm, but they're almost all utterly bogus. In cases where it can't be proven who is right juries all too often see injured person, deep pockets that were involved and skip over the lack of evidence that said deep pockets actually caused any harm. Thus we moved to a system where medical people decide whether the vaccine did harm rather than juries.

Look at the persistent claims that vaccines cause autism--never mind that this has been solidly debunked. Or look at what happened to DOW Corning--got destroyed by a liability lawsuit over breast implants, but by the time the science was in it turns out the main part of the claim was based on nothing. There were legitimate cases due to ruptures, but if anything the women with implants were less likely to have the alleged issues than the ones without.

Not to mention that such claims are prejudiced against autistic people.

Some of the smartest people I know on these forums are autistic. I have yet to meet anyone capable of the sorts of feats of creativity and genius displayed by my autistic friends.

Autism is so central to the creative mind that in the Medieval period, multiple gnostic cults attempted to map the comorbidities of high-functioning autistic people and documented attempts at expressing them in order to attain the level of creative problem solving their autistic peers displayed, to include gender-neutrality.

I see it in many ways as not only an attack on vaccines but an attack on neurodiversity.

 

[steve_bank]

Two people in our office tested positive for covid over the weekend. First case we've had for a while.

Wow, I thought testing was a hoax. They are designed to show positive results for a perctentage of tests.

Testing is a conspiracy to sell vaccines. Right?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Two people in our office tested positive for covid over the weekend. First case we've had for a while.

What a bunch of morons. Don't they know if they don't test, they won't get it.

 

[Jarhyn]

Turns out the 1yo son of the bride got COVID from daycare or whatever, started coughing all around the wedding, and now there's an outbreak.

Practically everyone involved with the wedding has it, including my husband and I.

Thankfully, symptoms are very light, though I do notice the brainfog.

 

[crazyfingers]

Turns out the 1yo son of the bride got COVID from daycare or whatever, started coughing all around the wedding, and now there's an outbreak.

Practically everyone involved with the wedding has it, including my husband and I.

Thankfully, symptoms are very light, though I do notice the brainfog.

That sucks. Keep them away from me. Not in southeast Massachusetts I hope? We test whenever anyone of us has cold/flu like symptoms.

 

[Jarhyn]

Turns out the 1yo son of the bride got COVID from daycare or whatever, started coughing all around the wedding, and now there's an outbreak.

Practically everyone involved with the wedding has it, including my husband and I.

Thankfully, symptoms are very light, though I do notice the brainfog.

That sucks. Keep them away from me. Not in southeast Massachusetts I hope? We test whenever anyone of us has cold/flu like symptoms.

Actually yes, we were in Mass. Sunderland area, the day after the wedding.

Ever hear of Bub's BBQ?

 

[steve_bank]

I wear a mask if I am in a store or on a crowded street. I shop at a grocery store in Chinatown. When I walk into Chinatown my mask goes on. Asians in general in the International District wear mask, more so than people around Seattle..

A mask hangs on my door knob so I don't forget it.

 

[steve_bank]

Turns out the 1yo son of the bride got COVID from daycare or whatever, started coughing all around the wedding, and now there's an outbreak.

Practically everyone involved with the wedding has it, including my husband and I.

Thankfully, symptoms are very light, though I do notice the brainfog.

Do you know it is COVID and not flu?