different people will have different risk/benefit profiles: should be self evident
that these vaccines are still in fact experimental: all current COVID vaccines are still being distributed under a EUA.
that there is no reproductive toxicity report for these vaccines: I checked on the status of this again, so far this study [1] that will be published next month seems to be all we have. Note that the study is on only 44 subjects, all of them rats. Additionally, please try going to the VAERS database [2] and do a query for “Spontaneous abortion” grouped by year, notice that out of the last 22 years, 48% of such events occurred in 2021 (which we are only about half through). Surely this needs some sort of follow up.
there is data showing that the lipid nanoparticles from this vaccine accumulate in the ovaries: [3], this is in rats, this should be followed up, especially when taken with the context VAERS data above, but the only follow ups I can find are hot takes from non-experts.
the rushed COVID vaccines are responsible for more all-cause deaths than the last 30 years of vaccines combined: [2] again, you can build the appropriate query yourself. I can’t draw a definitive conclusion here, but it’s rather scary that this is being mostly ignored except by right-wing media who are quick to draw their own possibly wrong from-the-hip conclusions.
that people with natural immunity have no evidence based reason to take these vaccines: here’s what The WHO has to say about it [4]. In general it seems when we are about X months past feb 2020, there is evidence that natural immunity works for about X minus 2 months. Which is to be expected as we are collecting data in real time. However the public is being constantly misdirected about this. The party line is that “long term immunity from natural infections is uncertain, but from vaccinations is certain” which cannot be a possible real conclusion because this virus has only been around for less than 2 years, and the vaccines for about half that time. If anything, we obviously know more about the long term immunity from natural infection, than the vaccine. And that WHO report sheepishly admits as much.
that mass vaccination during pandemics create evolutionary pressure for immune escape variants: feel like this should be a no-brainer, but here’s one random article that goes in depth about it [4]
there is now data showing that antibody-dependent enhancement is a real possibility due to these vaccines: there was an NBC report 2 days ago that showed signs that this might be the case, but it got memory-holed [5]. Here’s another symptom of ADE [6]. This (and all the other points) should be talked about, addressed, followed up on. Not condescendingly swept under the rug as conspiracy theories.
A sincere thank you for all of those links, very educational.
It seems to me that the "condescending sweep under the rug" you identify is motivated by the same reasoning that caused Fauci to declare early on that masks don't work - people need to be manipulated into doing the "right thing", and exposing them to information that might make them not do the right thing is bad, therefore that information must be suppressed.
Then, it was "we don't want people hoarding masks that are more urgently needed by healthcare workers, so tell them masks don't work". Now, it's "we need as many people getting vaccinated as possible, so suppress and cast doubt on all information that might make people hesitate". A few decades ago, this likely would have been effective (although arguably morally reprehensible) public health policy. With the internet, not only does that not work anymore but it actually backfires spectacularly, and our government elites haven't come to terms with that.
I find it at least somewhat reassuring that the biggest unknown potential side effect of the vaccine seems to be around female reproductive health, but the demographic by far most at risk from covid is past their reproductive years anyway. The ADE discussion I know nothing about, but look forward to reading; thanks again for the links.
With regards to reproductive toxicity report, I’m not really sure how to prove the absence of something, but the best study I found is on 44 rats. Let me know if you can do better. Aside from that, the VAERS miscarriage data directly supports the hypothesis that the COVID vaccines do indeed have some sort of effect on reproductive health. Can you provide some other explanation for that data?
The VAERS data also directly supports my statement about there being more deaths due to this vaccine than all the rest of the previous 20 years put together.
I am finding many articles that support the fact that natural immunity is at least as good as the vaccines. Here’s another study if the WHO isn’t good enough for you. https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/natural-immunity-after... please let me know if you find anything to the contrary.
Recent evidence supports ADE, but I agree it’s not something to be concluded just yet. The ADE hypothesis directly explains higher titer rates in vaccinated cases unvaccinated and also the fact that more vaccinated counties in California have higher case rates currently. This needs to be looked into further, but if the deleted NBC article is anything to go by, ADE will instead be memory-holed.
Anything else that you specifically have a problem with?
With regards to the VAERS data, it’s simply a matter of numbers. 140m people vaccinated, almost all of them older than 18, and all of them in a short time period. A disproportionate percentage of whom are elderly, by the way. Some of them are going to die after getting a shot for no particular reason.
As far as the miscarriage bit - somewhere between 15-25% of pregnancies end in a miscarriage. 4.4m pregnancies a year, 366k pregnancies a month, 33m women in the us of peak childbearing age, that means that in any given month ~1% of women discover they are pregnant. Most miscarriages happen in the first 12 weeks so we can roughly assume 3% of peak childbearing age women are within their first 12 weeks at any given moment. About 40% of that original group of women has had at least 1 shot, which works out to 2.2m/mo and 73k/day. 3% of 73k means that 2200 first trimester women every day got a shot. Every day, ~400-500 of those women will go on to miscarry at some point within their first trimester. Surely some reasonable percentage of those people will have that happen within a few days - if we say they’re all at the median of 6 weeks along, they have a 17% chance of miscarrying within a week, which means every day you have 7-8 women who get a vaccine shot and miscarry within a week.
This is all obviously an estimation, but the math works. In reality the odds of miscarrying drop as you approach 12 weeks, so if anything, the odds of miscarrying within a week at six weeks is HIGHER than within the following two week.
EDIT:I didn’t even think about the fact that unless you’re getting thr j&j you need two shots, so that’s two chances for a miscarriage within a week, so adjust appropriately .
Yes I agree that math seems to work. I also agree that it is safe to assume that the COVID vaccine is somewhat unique in that it is being administered to women of childbearing age more than almost all other vaccines, which typically get administered to children.
So for a more like-to-like comparison, let’s look at flu vaccine numbers, which gets administered to about 40% of American adults every year (including women of childbearing age). That would mean over the 20 years before 2021, about 250 million flu shots were administered to women of childbearing age, which is at least 5x more than the ~50 million doses of COVID vaccines given to women of child bearing age (my upper estimate based on your quoted vaccination rate for women of childbearing age times 6 months times 2 doses). However, anywhere between 40%-48% of spontaneous abortions over the last 20 years (depending on your exact query) are from this year. Which to me implies that the COVID vaccines are many times more harmful for reproduction than the flu vaccines, and the harm multiplier only gets bigger considering that there are other vaccines that women of childbearing might get that aren’t just the flu vaccine that I’m not counting.
In any case, there is
clearly some debate to be had here, that probably neither of us are really qualified to have. However it is worrying to me that attention doesn’t really get drawn to this and we don’t have many real experts weighing in on what this data means.
Or, when a woman gets a flu shot and then has a miscarriage, she doesn’t assume it was because of the flu shot, because she’s had a flu shot many times before. It seems like you’re being deliberately obtuse here.
I think I’m being very transparent and open minded. I’ll admit your hypothesis about the mundaneness of flu shots is very possible. My only point is that that hypothesis or some other hypothesis needs to be confirmed by experts. Instead the only people we have commenting on this are right wing pundits that have their own axe to grind.
