This is my personal version of the "Bucket Challenge" but my challenge is based on data skills rather than physical skills. Can you complete the challenge?
Plus there are plenty of state databases that show the same thing. They show more hospitalizations and deaths for the unvaxed. I've yet to see you address the CDC and state databases.
UNvaxxed - my husband (66) & I (65) are healthy. We both had the virus in 2021. We will never expose our bodies to an EXPERIMENTAL gene-editing injection. "Like any other medical treatment, the right to choose does not belong to the state, it belongs to the individual" ~ Rocco Galati
I remain the only one in my family unvaccinated and am the only one who did not contract Covid. I took care of my 29 year old daughter for one month while she continues to battle long Covid. My husband contracted it on Christmas eve last year and my daughter subsequently contracted it again. - She had to be put on beta blockers for the better half of a year… No one can explain to me WHY I don’t get it..
I'm not understanding why you think that Brian Mowrey "won." The challenge was to show "data proving that the unvaccinated are experiencing any symptom that is associated with the COVID vaccine injured at an equal to or higher rate than their overall percentage of the population." The paper purports to show that "COVID-19 mRNA vaccination was not associated with an increased risk of any serious adverse events resulting in hospitalisation." Although a bit surprising, that's not the same thing as evidence that they are not "experiencing any SYMPTOM" at a rate equal to or less than the general population. You go on to point out that the data show thrombocytopenia occurs at a rate among the vaccinated "four times higher than in the unvaccinated and that this rate differential is highly statistically significant," which would seem to undermine the broader claim. And that's not even getting into all of the problems with the data already pointed out by other commenters.
I think you are are being overly generous in giving Brian a win, although I appreciate him calling attention to the paper.
I reluctantly took the jab last year as I wanted to go to Hawaii for a wedding and to go surfing. I'm only 40 and had no medical issues prior to the jab. I ran about 20 miles a week. I work in a medical clinic that offered us free cardiac scans- mine came out completely normal. I week after my jab I went to the hospital because of chest pain. They did a cardiac cath and it revealed blockage of my cardiac arteries. So, I ended up needing triple bypass surgery. I will never take any vaccine again. My cardiologist had never seen someone with a normal cardiac scan just 7 months prior to the jab need triple bypass surgery, but of course he dismissed any connection to the jab.
The issue is that the data is not randomized. Association on non-randomized sample (namely, you didn't pick randomly and assign one person to vaxxed, another to non-vaxxed group; they selected themselves into those categories) merely tells you that the vax and some health outcome are in a common web of causes and effects, but the nature of the links within that web must be uncovered by hard science, such as randomized trials or animal/human experiments with long-term follow-up. The fact that these vax companies do not want to conduct these experiments to show how great their product is only makes their position look bad.
This is no different than observing that people that often visit an allergy doctor will have more allergies than those who don't ever visit one, even though allergy doctors help people deal with their allergies. It is precisely because of that assistance that visiting allergy doctors becomes a proxy for having allergies, hence for the higher incidence. Interestingly, there is also a proper dose-response relation (those visiting more often will have more serious allergies). This is known as a "confounding variable."
But if you disregard this self-selection mechanism, as it is routinely done in propaganda pieces regarding the health effects of the "vaccines" and only observe statistical associations of that kind, you may well jump to the wrong conclusion that visiting allergy doctors cause allergies.
Of course, the fact alone that after 2 years of these products being around, we will only hear about associations on non-randomized samples (unvaxxed have more of this or that disease or other problems than the vaxxed), but not about results of hard science (such as multiple experiments by different scientists that are truly randomized), is more telling than anything else -- they are so quiet about the hard science since it will inevitably go the "wrong" way.
An obvious potential confounding variable here is people being immunocompromised. In the USA, about 3% of adults are immunocompromised: transplant recipients, people with cancer, those with HIV, and individuals who take immunosuppressants. The immunocompromised already cannot receive certain vaccinations at all, as a rule, and it is the case that some would have been instructed not to get these new COVID-19 shots by their doctors.
There are other potential confounding variables. Over 100 Americans die every day from opiate overdose, mostly intravenous fentanyl. What are the "vaccination" rates of homeless heroin addicts compared to the general population? Also, how often do they even know vaccination status? Pro-vax enthusiasts were quicky to claim that the embalmers/morticians pulling giant clots out of corpses "couldn't have known their vaccination status" but how exactly do authorities know the vaccination status of a person found dead in their apartment from drug overdose?
For these reasons and more, I don't think the majority of the mere "vax'd vs unvax'd" will be very conclusive.
Humor is the last bastion of free speech. A truth can still be communicated under the thin veil of humor and slip past the censors ……for now. Imagine a future where there will be a “Commission of Misinformation Based Humor “.
This statistic has been consistent almost since the state started publishing it early this year:
The 12/8/2022 State of Connecticut weekly Covid Data summary indicates that 54.1% of new cases this past week were "Not Fully Vaccinated". The daily version of the report published yesterday states that the "...percent of patients currently hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 that are not fully vaccinated" was 32.55%. Daily "Covid-related deaths" are in the single digits.
Here's some data suggesting the opposite (sorry, I won't win) : A german nurse gave 8,600 health care workerrs over 70 years old saline instead of the COVID vaccine. None of them developed a severe COIVD infection - and I bet they have better health/mortality than their vaccinated co-horts. Health officials noted that there was no indication that severe COVID-19 infections had occurred in the more than 8,000 individuals as a result of having saline injections instead of the vaccine.
Here's some data that shows more deaths for the unvaxed:
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#rates-by-vaccine-status
Plus there are plenty of state databases that show the same thing. They show more hospitalizations and deaths for the unvaxed. I've yet to see you address the CDC and state databases.
I believe that 100%. He is our only hope against this tyranny. Yes, thank you… you can say M,L&S.
Wow! I’m so sorry to hear that but I’m very happy u were able to remain unvaxxed.
UNvaxxed - my husband (66) & I (65) are healthy. We both had the virus in 2021. We will never expose our bodies to an EXPERIMENTAL gene-editing injection. "Like any other medical treatment, the right to choose does not belong to the state, it belongs to the individual" ~ Rocco Galati
I remain the only one in my family unvaccinated and am the only one who did not contract Covid. I took care of my 29 year old daughter for one month while she continues to battle long Covid. My husband contracted it on Christmas eve last year and my daughter subsequently contracted it again. - She had to be put on beta blockers for the better half of a year… No one can explain to me WHY I don’t get it..
The study only counted „covid hospitalization“ ? Is that the loophole here? You know vs „myocarditis hospitalization“?
‘Those convinced against their will deny it still.” The truth is a very bitter pill to swallow.
I'm not understanding why you think that Brian Mowrey "won." The challenge was to show "data proving that the unvaccinated are experiencing any symptom that is associated with the COVID vaccine injured at an equal to or higher rate than their overall percentage of the population." The paper purports to show that "COVID-19 mRNA vaccination was not associated with an increased risk of any serious adverse events resulting in hospitalisation." Although a bit surprising, that's not the same thing as evidence that they are not "experiencing any SYMPTOM" at a rate equal to or less than the general population. You go on to point out that the data show thrombocytopenia occurs at a rate among the vaccinated "four times higher than in the unvaccinated and that this rate differential is highly statistically significant," which would seem to undermine the broader claim. And that's not even getting into all of the problems with the data already pointed out by other commenters.
I think you are are being overly generous in giving Brian a win, although I appreciate him calling attention to the paper.
What databases are valid for a challenger?
I reluctantly took the jab last year as I wanted to go to Hawaii for a wedding and to go surfing. I'm only 40 and had no medical issues prior to the jab. I ran about 20 miles a week. I work in a medical clinic that offered us free cardiac scans- mine came out completely normal. I week after my jab I went to the hospital because of chest pain. They did a cardiac cath and it revealed blockage of my cardiac arteries. So, I ended up needing triple bypass surgery. I will never take any vaccine again. My cardiologist had never seen someone with a normal cardiac scan just 7 months prior to the jab need triple bypass surgery, but of course he dismissed any connection to the jab.
"The unvaxed were supposed to die last year. I say they will all be dead within 100 years". My favorite line in the article.
The issue is that the data is not randomized. Association on non-randomized sample (namely, you didn't pick randomly and assign one person to vaxxed, another to non-vaxxed group; they selected themselves into those categories) merely tells you that the vax and some health outcome are in a common web of causes and effects, but the nature of the links within that web must be uncovered by hard science, such as randomized trials or animal/human experiments with long-term follow-up. The fact that these vax companies do not want to conduct these experiments to show how great their product is only makes their position look bad.
This is no different than observing that people that often visit an allergy doctor will have more allergies than those who don't ever visit one, even though allergy doctors help people deal with their allergies. It is precisely because of that assistance that visiting allergy doctors becomes a proxy for having allergies, hence for the higher incidence. Interestingly, there is also a proper dose-response relation (those visiting more often will have more serious allergies). This is known as a "confounding variable."
But if you disregard this self-selection mechanism, as it is routinely done in propaganda pieces regarding the health effects of the "vaccines" and only observe statistical associations of that kind, you may well jump to the wrong conclusion that visiting allergy doctors cause allergies.
Of course, the fact alone that after 2 years of these products being around, we will only hear about associations on non-randomized samples (unvaxxed have more of this or that disease or other problems than the vaxxed), but not about results of hard science (such as multiple experiments by different scientists that are truly randomized), is more telling than anything else -- they are so quiet about the hard science since it will inevitably go the "wrong" way.
An obvious potential confounding variable here is people being immunocompromised. In the USA, about 3% of adults are immunocompromised: transplant recipients, people with cancer, those with HIV, and individuals who take immunosuppressants. The immunocompromised already cannot receive certain vaccinations at all, as a rule, and it is the case that some would have been instructed not to get these new COVID-19 shots by their doctors.
There are other potential confounding variables. Over 100 Americans die every day from opiate overdose, mostly intravenous fentanyl. What are the "vaccination" rates of homeless heroin addicts compared to the general population? Also, how often do they even know vaccination status? Pro-vax enthusiasts were quicky to claim that the embalmers/morticians pulling giant clots out of corpses "couldn't have known their vaccination status" but how exactly do authorities know the vaccination status of a person found dead in their apartment from drug overdose?
For these reasons and more, I don't think the majority of the mere "vax'd vs unvax'd" will be very conclusive.
Steve - You can offer any reward you want. Your money is safe . . .
Humor is the last bastion of free speech. A truth can still be communicated under the thin veil of humor and slip past the censors ……for now. Imagine a future where there will be a “Commission of Misinformation Based Humor “.
This statistic has been consistent almost since the state started publishing it early this year:
The 12/8/2022 State of Connecticut weekly Covid Data summary indicates that 54.1% of new cases this past week were "Not Fully Vaccinated". The daily version of the report published yesterday states that the "...percent of patients currently hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 that are not fully vaccinated" was 32.55%. Daily "Covid-related deaths" are in the single digits.
Here's some data suggesting the opposite (sorry, I won't win) : A german nurse gave 8,600 health care workerrs over 70 years old saline instead of the COVID vaccine. None of them developed a severe COIVD infection - and I bet they have better health/mortality than their vaccinated co-horts. Health officials noted that there was no indication that severe COVID-19 infections had occurred in the more than 8,000 individuals as a result of having saline injections instead of the vaccine.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/nurse-who-pretended-to-give-covid-19-vaccine-to-thousands-of-elderly-in-germany-avoids-prison_4913466.htm