| Indeed, and I feel "large-scale statistical analysis" is one of the things we are lacking. More research into VAERS data and also Europe's adverse events reporting tool. There's so many more reports there compared to other vaccines, it seems quite scary to me. It's not scientific evidence, but to me it still seems alarming enough, and it's hard for me to think what other thing except the vaccine itself could've caused that many reports. What are the exact odds of getting e.g. heart related issues like Myocarditis? Considering my demographics (28y male), fit, healthy what are the chances for me to get long lasting issues either affecting mental or physical performance? I don't believe for instance that Myocarditis is 1 out of 100,000. There's anecdotal stories of couples getting these adverse effects together. See "danielshep60". I don't believe he's lying either, considering he's shown all paperwork, medications etc, he also said, after he and his partner both got diagnosed, he called around his social circle to see if anyone else was experiencing chest pains, which his cousin did and he urged him to go check it out, and also got diagnosed with Myocarditis. There may be a lot of undiagnosed Myocarditis going on as well. Then besides heart issues, what is being more frequently reported by vaccine long haulers, is 1) fatigue and 2) brain fog. So now I'm worried about both mental performance, as my work requires mental performance, and physical performance since I do sports. There's no good way to link fatigue and brain fog back to vaccines, so how could I know what is the frequency of those? Then of course I did research into how runners have been faring after vaccination. I searched reddit.com/r/running, for posts. There's 50/50 whether vaccine had any effect at all, or some people couldn't run for the following 1 to 7 days which is fine, but I'd say around 1:15 - 1:30 ratio of commenters said even after many months they were still unable to run even a mile, although previously they were able to run 5-10km+. Then I'm concerned about how the trials were made. For example with Pfizer, just recently coming out the report about data integrity in BMJ, and also trial participants in some cases being excluded when they had adverse effects, AND the way they seemingly were letting people report side effects in an app where they did it after a week and there were only pre-determined side effects available to select from and no free-form text. If you wanted to report something else you had to contact them, and in some cases it seems these contacts were ignored and not reported in the final study. There's many more concern for me from vaccines, but I'll just stop now, because the biggest argument against those is that "covid is probably worse, so just take the risk with vaccine, or alternative is worse". So my current strategy is to stay at home, and I believe by doing this I have 1% or less chance to contract covid within the following year. Maybe during that time things, data clears up, or there's better solutions available to either covid or to any damage vaccines may cause. By that I'm avoiding potential unknowns about both covid19, and the vaccine. Also I'm keeping my R very low, even if I was to get covid19, I would not be likely to spread it since I spend my time at home with no people around, except for some edge cases. If everyone behaved like me I believe the virus would die out. I have gone over many studies about both Covid19, and vaccines. I believe if you are frequently in contact with people and/or in risk group you probably should take the vaccine to reduce chance of hospitalisation and deaths, but I don't think it's calculated decision for me, personally. I definitely don't want to get Covid19 and I believe it can cause a lot of long term damage + unknown damage, but so can the vaccine, albeit very likely to a lesser extent. Also vaccine effect will wade in 6 months and it doesn't seem like it would protect breakthrough infections that could also cause long term damage, so then you may have done already vaccinations multiple times and also still get the infection which would again increase chances of total long term damage. |
1. VAERS data & co.
This is the biggest vaccination campaign in history. 7.25 billion doses have been administered to date. It also happens to be underway under a sociopolitical and technological climate which promotes superfast information sharing where misinformation can spread extremely fast. It is undeniable that much of this misinformation has concerned the vaccine.
Combining the fact that a shit ton of people have been getting vaccinated and the current climate, is it really surprising that we see a spike in an unvetted, online side effect submission system? I mean, this would not be worrying even if this was just a large vaccination campaign. It is an enormous vaccination campaign, the biggest in history, undertaken in a climate which promotes misinformation and probably interacts with societal group psychology in complex ways (for example, are people perhaps more likely to fall prey to the placebo effect and report/over-exaggerate their S.E.s in VAERS?)
2. Myocarditis
A valid concern, but all data points to it being extremely rare as well as mild (0.0006% incidence rate?).
As well as that, recent theory suggests it may be linked to administration method (erroneous administration into vein instead of muscle) instead of the vaccine itself.
I know you said you "don't believe" the statistics, but... that's just not really how statistics works? You cite purely anecdotal evidence from your friend group to disprove large-scale international analysis. This is laughable. Incidence in your friend group means absolutely nothing in the context of an international rollout. If we're playing the anecdote game, I know hundreds of people who've gotten the vaccine, none of which have gotten myocarditis. This must mean it never occurs. Also, I really don't care about "danielshep60". Citing a random Internet user is even more ridiculous than citing your friend group or family. I don't think I even need to get into it, but even if what they are saying is true, it means nothing in the grand scale of things.
3. Fatigue & brain fog
I should start by noting that fatigue & brain fog are widely documented to be common symptoms of the long COVID syndrome, which affects old and young. Long COVID is also alarmingly common.
I'd have to see proper evidence showing a statistically relevant correlation between vaccination & long-term brain fog/fatigue.
I'm sorry to report that a subreddit does not consist of any kind of valuable correlative indicator when talking about the medical domain. There is just such a swarm of flaws in such analysis that it must be discarded entirely (biased sampling, placebo, and fabrication being the top three).
Unfortunately, many of your arguments fall back to a common faulty root: ignoring large-scale analysis and falling back to anecdotal evidence (a la Nicki Minaj "friend of cousin got swollen testicles because of the vaccine!").
As for the BMJ trial, this is an ongoing investigation and I can't really comment without more data. We will see! :)