Coronavirus in the United States - news and thoughts

It is only an increase because of the nature of the research design, which is incorrectly designed to study a hypothesis of increased sudden cardiac deaths. The baseline data doesn't contain cancer deaths, as it was carefully curated by researchers not to contain such deaths and only deaths of a single cause (sudden cardiac deaths). The post-event data contains many forms of deaths, as it was less carefully curated by non-researchers without proper documentation, including cancer deaths. This results in an "increase" in deaths due to deaths from other causes, such as cancer, when no such increase actually happened. It really isn't that complicated to understand.

 

So athletes are collapsing from cancer ? Room, meet elephant.

 

Dying due to cancer. Yes. Just as they did before, but which was not included in the data on baseline deaths due to sudden cardiac failures, as would be expected by researchers trying to conduct properly designed research.

Again, if you want to claim to be a critical thinker, you should have at least the ability to understand basic research design issues (and this is about as basic as it gets- we are talking freshman level stats stuff here). Short of that, you aren't actually thinking critically, as critical thought requires you to challenge your own hypotheses.

 

Based on our examination of virological claims, you’re hardly the source to lecture on deciphering studies. And you still need to explain the dramatic increase in athletes collapsing all over the world and the disturbing spike in young deaths coinciding with vaccine rollout.

Add ...

https://dpbh.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/d.../Meetings/2021/Public Comments 324 to 328.pdf

 

On that front, I posted an article, and you didn't even read it as told me to go to a section that didn't exist and find where they described something they didn't do. So yeah, I am the person to lecture you on this. You need to do better if you want to be taken as anything more than you generally are here.

In terms of your linked email, they are seriously trying to claim these as athlete deaths:

(58) A fan of the Belgian second division team from Lier collapsed on October 27, 2021 in the stadium with heart problems and died in hospital.
(59) On the same day (27.10.2021) also in Belgium, the cup match against Dender of Eupen: A fan collapses with cardiac arrest and must be revived.
(61) England: A fan collapses after the Cup game Stoke City against Brentford on October 27, 2021 in front of the stadium with cardiac arrest and dies.

BTW, that wasn't even all of the "fan" medical events. Fans are not athletes. Even if they are at a stadium. Then you add on the random people who had events at the gym or while jogging, and yeah, that article is absurd. I looked at it critically. You clearly didn't, or you wouldn't have posted it.

Again, if you want people to take this seriously, stop exaggerating claims by trying to pump up the number by including fans as athletes.

 

I don’t think you’re qualified to proceed from that earlier discussion. Your response continues to be something akin to discounting an argument because it contained a typo. Then when the subject turned to the dramatic rise in athletes falling dead, you urped up “blog.”

Of course I suppose I could be wrong and vaccines are just the leading cause of coincidences.

 

Yes the vast majority of vaccinated are dying of Covid. Because that group is the most at risk being older.

It is criminal to suggest a young healthy person take these shots today. Probably was from the beginning. But definitely today.

They know. Doctors know. There is a serious legitimate safety signal for myocarditis in younger people and that they are at little to no risk from the disease. They know the seroprevalence shows a majority of people period have some form of natural protection.

Your obsession with pushing these shots is out of propaganda or the inability to accept the fact you know it was the wrong decision to give them to your kids. The propaganda was strong early to give kids the shots. And it was based on bad science and medicine. Now it is just stupid. And therefore evil to be pushed by so called experts at this point and time. I want to give them the benefit of the doubt early on. But I can’t get there now.

 

No shot at this point should be given to a young healthy person based on safety signals and benefit. And it should be full force to try and study this. But they did a good job to make that really hard by pushing these shots on a massive population group that did not need them.

 

Well this is all just false. You claimed that you found methods that they didn't do in a section that didn't exist. That isn't a typo.

Second, you posted a "paper" that utilized a blog that didn't correctly classify deaths and compared it to a well-run paper that did correctly classify deaths in order to generate a result. If you don't understand the research design issues in doing that, you aren't really capable of having an informed opinion on a scientific matter.

Third, you posted an email in which they claimed that fans, people jogging, and people at the gym were all "athletes" to try to prove how common athlete deaths are. That is, on its face, absurd.

So, here we are. You have two options: confirm most people's opinion of you that you aren't really capable of critical thought and are just trolling or try to show yourself capable of it by learning something and acknowledging where you made pretty obvious errors. Your choice.

 

Why would we need to study something that you just definitively declared? Either your definitive declaration isn't based on enough evidence to make such a declaration or we don't need to study it because we have enough information to be making such statement. I'll let you work out whichever one you would prefer (as I know that is how you will decide), but at least try to make the argument internally consistent.

 

You did not even read your own meta analysis. You claim it examined RCTs when it actually excluded them…


“2.2. Inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria
All real-world studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Intervention studies (such as randomized controlled studies), animal studies, comments, review articles, case reports, or studies without available data were excluded from the meta-analysis….”

I am sure there are plenty of worthless studies happening. I think there are probably some good ones happening. But there is no doubt we are not making this a priority right now. Instead we are telling young healthy people they should take a shot they don’t need. And that is criminal.

 

I didn't say the meta-analysis included the intervention studies. Maybe you assumed that is what I said, but it is not. Nice try.

Second, given your constant references to "the data," I'd be careful declaring observational studies useless.

Regardless, there are RCTs studying the safety profile of the vaccines. The initial approval required them as a balance against benefit. So what I said is correct. Here is one of you want it:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2034577

It seems like your problem is that the studies don't all back your hypothesis, which you never declare with any level of doubt.

 

I don’t totally dismiss the chance that vaccines may be causing some rare cases of cardiac death, but what would you think is more likely?

- these excess cardiac deaths are due to vaccines
- these excess cardiac deaths are due to residual effects of Covid infection
- these excess deaths are from documentable decrease in preventative cardiac care, partly due to backlogs, during the pandemic?

Looking at just myocarditis, your odds of getting myocarditis, after getting Covid, are actually lower if you’ve previously had the vaccine.

Acute Myocardial Infarction and Ischemic Stroke After COVID-19 by Vaccination Status

Plus every bit of research I’ve seen shows the risk of myocarditis is significantly higher after Covid than after vaccine, except for maybe in young adult males.

 

Myocarditis risk with the vaccine is highest in males 16 - 24. But the overwhelming majority of cases are mild. MIS-C, on the other hand, is always serious. And 98% of MIS-C cases come from unvaccinated kids.

This is a good reason to vaccinate kids. It reduces the odds of MIS-C to almost zero. Maybe it raises the risk of myocarditis a tad, but that risk is worth all but eliminating the more dangerous, and deadly MIS-C.

Goes along with this study that showed unvaccinated kids were twice as likely to be hospitalized than vaccinated kids. Risks for kids may be low to begin with, but why now lower them more?

 

No. We don’t have any good studies on a very important issue. Instead we have policy to suggest jabbing people who don’t need a shot when there are known safety signals.

And you find a meta analysis that provides an answer it was looking for. Which says the shots do cause myocarditis. Yet you and others somehow think it shows low risk people should take a shot that does not stop them from getting the disease that the meta analysis says might cause myocarditis at a higher rate.

These shots would never have been approved for a young healthy person in any normal drug roll out. It is criminal at this point and time to continue and push them on young healthy people and arguably anyone.

 

The same ones that early on complained and said that we were linking every death to covid are the ones that now want to link every death to the covid vaccine.

@gatorplank completely missed the BHF's explanation for excess deaths

There are also millions of “missing” heart patients, both diagnosed and undiagnosed, who have struggled to access care for conditions that put people at much greater risk of a future heart attack or stroke, like high blood pressure.

Modelling from NHS England suggests that the decline in blood pressure management since the pandemic began could lead to an extra 11,190 heart attacks and 16,702 additional strokes over a three-year period.

We have urged the new Government to tackle the heart care crisis head-on with a heart strategy that can deliver for current and future heart patients.

Extreme heart care disruption linked to 30,000 excess deaths involving heart disease

 

Yes. Lockdowns and putting the unnecessary fear that being within a made up number of 6 feet of someone would give them a disease that was not they dangerous to most is another cause of the problem. It did cause people to unnecessarily be fearful of the doctor. Shoot it was considered non essential in this country for a while unless you were actually having an emergency event to even go to the doctor. These public health idiots caused and have caused generational damage.

But to ignore the shots (that we know have a safety signal) and just not even consider them as we promote them for children in this country is the antithesis of medicine and science. We need to look at it all. Lockdowns/Covid/Shots/Covid and Shot…

 

Your diatribe was unnecessary and completely missed the point. People are blaming covid vaccines for 30k excess deaths.

 

I’d be shocked if it’s not a helluva lot more than that.