Another Thai woman dies after receiving AstraZeneca COVID-19 jab

[Tony125]

On 6/14/2021 at 5:16 PM, Hepbub said:

We hear of these deaths, but no-one hears of any related illnesses which might have contributed to the death. My wife is terrified of getting the vaccine now because of these stories. people should be forced to print the results of how the person died. Not just "died after receiving the AZ jab". That is just scare mongering!

Unfortunately there have been some bad side effects  and even deaths with the Mrna and Adenovirus  vaccines---not with the  Chinese one = Inactivated virus  (made like older vaccines)

AstraZeneca shots should be halted for over-60s - EMA official

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/astrazeneca-shots-halted-over-60s-083043034.html

 

 

 

 

Some 2,000 people had 'severe adverse reactions' to Pfizer, Moderna vaccine: MOH

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/some-2000-severe-adverse-reaction-pfizer-moderna-vaccine-moh-155029894.html

[placeholder]

6 hours ago, MainBerry said:

 

40 per 1 million is a calculation based on f. ex. the USA system VAERS. They report around 6000 deaths so far for 150 million vaccinated. 150 million / 6000 = 40 per 1 million. No doubt my opinion on this is that it is extremely under reported. 

 

Source: https://www.openvaers.com/covid-data/mortality

 

Yes, senior citizens die of and with covid. A lot. But the age group 0-50 are absolutely not (based on the statistic I posted above). What you are saying there would lead to a statistically better outcome in total numbers but in the progress people are getting killed by the vaccine which would be not dying of covid. This trade off seems to be very cruel. I am more for a scientific approach: Vaccinate the elders and the people with serious medical ilnesses, forbid the vacvinnation of the age group 0-18 and everybody else, up to them.

Anybody can report an incident to the VAERS system. Patients, caregivers, relatives. Keep in mind that these reports are referred to as "adverse incidents". Not "adverse reactions".

Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data

When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.

https://www.openvaers.com/covid-data/mortality

[MainBerry]

Just now, placeholder said:

Anybody can report an incident to the VAERS system. Patients, caregivers, relatives. Keep in mind that these reports are referred to as "adverse incidents". Not "adverse reactions".

Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data

When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.

https://www.openvaers.com/covid-data/mortality

 

Yes, we informed know that and unfortunately that's how it works in the biggest vaccination campaign ever and we are taking it like this. Still, as the data from multiple sources (which I have portrayed in this thread) correlate, it seems to be showing a trend towards what is actually happening.

 

Basically we take the word of Pharma companies right now.

 

It's not the same, I know but we have data of what happened in the past with those companies:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_pharmaceutical_settlements

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, MainBerry said:

 

Yes, we informed know that and unfortunately that's how it works in the biggest vaccination campaign ever and we are taking it like this. Still, as the data from multiple sources (which I have portrayed in this thread) correlate, it seems to be showing a trend towards what is actually happening.

 

Basically we take the word of Pharma companies right now.

 

It's not the same, I know but we have data of what happened in the past with those companies:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_pharmaceutical_settlements

I did look at that link and nothing appears there about falsifying test data. And of course now, the world's attention is focused on them. Which would make any falsification of data or coverup suicidal.

[moe666]

On 6/14/2021 at 5:22 PM, scubascuba3 said:

What was that? last i heard she just suffered with migraines.

 

 

If it is a Astrazeneca vaccine thing, maybe it's because it's made in Thailand

Not made in Thailand, the base chemicals are manufactured in other AZ factories and shipped here for bottleing and canning

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Tony125 said:

Unfortunately there have been some bad side effects  and even deaths with the Mrna and Adenovirus  vaccines---not with the  Chinese one = Inactivated virus  (made like older vaccines)

AstraZeneca shots should be halted for over-60s - EMA official

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/astrazeneca-shots-halted-over-60s-083043034.html

 

 

 

 

Some 2,000 people had 'severe adverse reactions' to Pfizer, Moderna vaccine: MOH

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/some-2000-severe-adverse-reaction-pfizer-moderna-vaccine-moh-155029894.html

You might want to look at those links again. Here's what the article accessed via the first link said:

"-The head of the EU drug regulator's COVID-19 task force said on Sunday that AstraZeneca's coronavirus vaccine had a favourable risk-benefit profile for all age groups and particularly for those aged over 60.

Italian newspaper La Stampa earlier quoted European Medicines Agency (EMA) task force chief Marco Cavaleri as saying countries should avoid giving the vaccine to people aged over 60 in addition to younger age groups, amid fears over very rare blood clotting and as alternative vaccines become available.

"Unfortunately my words have not been interpreted correctly in a recent interview with La Stampa," Cavaleri said in a statement to Reuters. The AstraZeneca shot "maintains a favourable benefit risk profile in all ages but particularly in the elderly above 60," he said."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/astrazeneca-shots-halted-over-60s-083043034.html

As for the 2nd link, no reported deaths.

[placeholder]

15 minutes ago, MainBerry said:

 

Yes, we informed know that and unfortunately that's how it works in the biggest vaccination campaign ever and we are taking it like this. Still, as the data from multiple sources (which I have portrayed in this thread) correlate, it seems to be showing a trend towards what is actually happening.

 

Basically we take the word of Pharma companies right now.

 

It's not the same, I know but we have data of what happened in the past with those companies:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_pharmaceutical_settlements

That's how VAERS always works. Anyone drawing conclulsions from it is using it as a Rorschach test. 

Edited June 15, 2021 by placeholder

[Tony125]

12 minutes ago, placeholder said:

You might want to look at those links again. Here's what the article accessed via the first link said:

"-The head of the EU drug regulator's COVID-19 task force said on Sunday that AstraZeneca's coronavirus vaccine had a favourable risk-benefit profile for all age groups and particularly for those aged over 60.

Italian newspaper La Stampa earlier quoted European Medicines Agency (EMA) task force chief Marco Cavaleri as saying countries should avoid giving the vaccine to people aged over 60 in addition to younger age groups, amid fears over very rare blood clotting and as alternative vaccines become available.

"Unfortunately my words have not been interpreted correctly in a recent interview with La Stampa," Cavaleri said in a statement to Reuters. The AstraZeneca shot "maintains a favourable benefit risk profile in all ages but particularly in the elderly above 60," he said."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/astrazeneca-shots-halted-over-60s-083043034.html

As for the 2nd link, no reported deaths.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/3/15/which-countries-have-halted-use-of-astrazenecas-covid-vaccine

 

How ever even though the WHO  recomends its use  many countries  either stopped or temporarily stopped  the use of Astrazeneca

 

Astrazeneca is not approved for use in USA

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/revised-astrazeneca-data-show-its-covid-19-vaccine-76-percent-effective-180977356/

Edited June 15, 2021 by Tony125

[placeholder]

27 minutes ago, MainBerry said:

 

Yes, we informed know that and unfortunately that's how it works in the biggest vaccination campaign ever and we are taking it like this. Still, as the data from multiple sources (which I have portrayed in this thread) correlate, it seems to be showing a trend towards what is actually happening.

 

Basically we take the word of Pharma companies right now.

 

It's not the same, I know but we have data of what happened in the past with those companies:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_pharmaceutical_settlements

Here's an article in response to Senator Ron Johnson's claim of over 3000 deaths after vaccination:

The VAERS system had 4,434 reports of deaths after coronavirus vaccinations as of May 10. That represents a mortality rate of 0.0017 percent, whereas the mortality rate for people who develop covid-19 is much higher: 1.8 percent in the United States, according to a database maintained by Johns Hopkins University.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/12/ron-johnsons-unscientific-use-vaccine-death-data/

So even if all those reported deaths can be established as being caused by the vaccines, which is dubious, that amounts to the equivalent of 17 deaths per 100 million. 

[MainBerry]

9 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Here's an article in response to Senator Ron Johnson's claim of over 3000 deaths after vaccination:

The VAERS system had 4,434 reports of deaths after coronavirus vaccinations as of May 10. That represents a mortality rate of 0.0017 percent, whereas the mortality rate for people who develop covid-19 is much higher: 1.8 percent in the United States, according to a database maintained by Johns Hopkins University.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/12/ron-johnsons-unscientific-use-vaccine-death-data/

So even if all those reported deaths can be established as being caused by the vaccines, which is dubious, that amounts to the equivalent of 17 deaths per 100 million. 

 

My calculator broke, how did you come to 17 deaths per 100 million if 4,434 are reported to have died? VAERS is USA based and if you use actual numbers of today, it is 5888 deaths reported by VAERS and 145 million fully vaccinated in the USA. Please recalculate.

 

Edited June 15, 2021 by MainBerry

[MainBerry]

34 minutes ago, placeholder said:

You might want to look at those links again. Here's what the article accessed via the first link said:

"-The head of the EU drug regulator's COVID-19 task force said on Sunday that AstraZeneca's coronavirus vaccine had a favourable risk-benefit profile for all age groups and particularly for those aged over 60.

Italian newspaper La Stampa earlier quoted European Medicines Agency (EMA) task force chief Marco Cavaleri as saying countries should avoid giving the vaccine to people aged over 60 in addition to younger age groups, amid fears over very rare blood clotting and as alternative vaccines become available.

"Unfortunately my words have not been interpreted correctly in a recent interview with La Stampa," Cavaleri said in a statement to Reuters. The AstraZeneca shot "maintains a favourable benefit risk profile in all ages but particularly in the elderly above 60," he said."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/astrazeneca-shots-halted-over-60s-083043034.html

As for the 2nd link, no reported deaths.

 

And we have also the other side of the story, just to get all the facts and not only one sided:

 

"Since there are few people who die from COVID-19 in Norway, the risk of dying after vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine would be higher than the risk of dying from the disease, particularly for younger people,"

 

Source: https://www.fhi.no/en/news/2021/astrazeneca-vaccine-removed-from-coronavirus-immunisation-programme-in-norw/

[talahtnut]

7 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Here's an article in response to Senator Ron Johnson's claim of over 3000 deaths after vaccination:

The VAERS system had 4,434 reports of deaths after coronavirus vaccinations as of May 10. That represents a mortality rate of 0.0017 percent, whereas the mortality rate for people who develop covid-19 is much higher: 1.8 percent in the United States, according to a database maintained by Johns Hopkins University.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/12/ron-johnsons-unscientific-use-vaccine-death-data/

So even if all those reported deaths can be established as being caused by the vaccines, which is dubious, that amounts to the equivalent of 17 deaths per 100 million. 

John Hopkins University is funded by the Gates Foundation,

Washington Post follows the narrative.

Who would you like to believe?

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, talahtnut said:

John Hopkins University is funded by the Gates Foundation,

Washington Post follows the narrative.

Who would you like to believe?

Wow. Amazing. The university has existed since 1876. Didn't know the Gates foundation was that old. How about I set you straight? The Gates Foundation has been supporting the Family Planning arm of the Johns Hopkins Public Health division. But even if the Foundation was funding vaccine research, it would take a truly sad and conspiratorial mindset to believe that some of the most eminent people in the field would be taking some sort of bribe to suppress or misreport data. Your comment says a lot about your mindset and the mindset of anyone who likes it. Not so much about reality, though.

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, MainBerry said:

 

And we have also the other side of the story, just to get all the facts and not only one sided:

 

"Since there are few people who die from COVID-19 in Norway, the risk of dying after vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine would be higher than the risk of dying from the disease, particularly for younger people,"

 

Source: https://www.fhi.no/en/news/2021/astrazeneca-vaccine-removed-from-coronavirus-immunisation-programme-in-norw/

And if you read the article it notes that Norway has already vaccinated most of its elderly population. And since young people are the ones most likely to be at risk from AZ, and Norway has access to other vaccines, it's not using  Astra Zeneca. But it is vaccinating its young people. And Norway's situation is not at all the same as Thailand's.

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, moe666 said:

Not made in Thailand, the base chemicals are manufactured in other AZ factories and shipped here for bottleing and canning

Really? So AZ has been setting up facilities around the world just for bottling and canning? Ya got any evidence for that?

AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccines made by Siam Bioscience pass quality testing in Europe and U.S., first batch delivery is near

Bangkok, 9 May 2021 - AstraZeneca announced today that the samples from test batches of the COVID-19 vaccine made by Siam Bioscience had passed the quality testing at AstraZeneca’s designated laboratories in Europe and in the U.S.

https://www.astrazeneca.com/country-sites/thailand.html

[richard_smith237]

8 hours ago, MainBerry said:

It is actually doctors and doctor panels at hospital deciding to put a death on VAERS, it is not a random guy working as a cashier just thinking "oh this could be something".

 

7 hours ago, MainBerry said:

Yeah, I acknowledge that I didn't know how the reporting of VAERS functions

 

2 hours ago, MainBerry said:

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

Anybody can report an incident to the VAERS system. Patients, caregivers, relatives. Keep in mind that these reports are referred to as "adverse incidents". Not "adverse reactions".

Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data

When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.

https://www.openvaers.com/covid-data/mortality

Expand  

 

Yes, we informed know that

 

Erm... it doesn’t seem you are as informed as you think you are !!! 

 

 

 

[robbioff]

On 6/14/2021 at 3:46 PM, Pattaya Spotter said:

Oh boy another one. Those "Chinese vaccines" so many were endlessly dumping on now don't look so bad.

I’m taking my chances with covid. 

[richard_smith237]

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

That's how VAERS always works. Anyone drawing conclulsions from it is using it as a Rorschach test. 

 

Exactly this...  

 

...... unfortunately, famous quotes come to mind... “arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon, no matter how good you are the bird is going to take s#it t on the board and strut around like it won anyway’ !!!.....  

 

Here we have a poster who keeps throwing out links which mean little, particularly when it comes to the reporting of post vaccine side effects and takes an over simplified and dumbed down approach to address a complex issue.

 

 

 

 

 

[talahtnut]

28 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Wow. Amazing. The university has existed since 1876. Didn't know the Gates foundation was that old. How about I set you straight?

Tut Tut, You did not read accurately, I said 'funds' JHU, not 'founds' JHU.

 

With the Gates Foundations' $20 million grant, total commitments to the

Johns Hopkins Initiative have reached $1.2 billion.

 

With that sort of doh, even you or anyone might be tempted to have

a different mindset.

[richard_smith237]

5 minutes ago, robbioff said:

I’m taking my chances with covid. 

 

Interesting how people say this with an element of pride..... 

 

Even those with an anti-covid-vaccine stance (in this thread) are suggesting the vaccines have 40 in 1,000,000 fatality rate. 

 

I’ve been reading elsewhere its closer to 4 in 1,000,000 people who have been proven to die as a direct result of the vaccine.

 

 

WHO stats: (Gross) Case Fatality rate for Covid-19 is 2.165% 

 

2.225% of the Global Population has tested positive for Covid-19

 

0.00489% of the Global Population have died from or related to Covid-19

 

 

Thus: Humans (in aggregate age groups) are 10x (or 100x) more likely to die of Covid-19 than the vaccine.

 

BUT - that stat does not accommodate risk weighting of age groups - as we all know the older folk are much more likely to die as a result of Covid-19 than healthy 30 year olds.

 

 

So.. If you are a healthy 30 year old by all means take your chance with Covid-19. 

 

But, if SARS-CoV-2 is allowed to continue to spread, it can potentially mutate (as it has been doing) into a variant which do impact younger people and if those variants have also evolve so quickly virologists have been unable to keep up with the inception of vaccine which can evolve along side them, then we are in trouble again. 

 

The vaccines are not just to protect the individual, but they are to slow down the virus so that virologists can keep up. 

 

I am amazed how many people missing this key issue. 

 

Vaccines - they not just about you, they’re about slowing down the spread virus to limit antigenic drift.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

12 minutes ago, talahtnut said:

53 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Wow. Amazing. The university has existed since 1876. Didn't know the Gates foundation was that old. How about I set you straight?

Tut Tut, You did not read accurately, I said 'funds' JHU, not 'founds' JHU.

 

With the Gates Foundations' $20 million grant, total commitments to the

Johns Hopkins Initiative have reached $1.2 billion.

 

With that sort of doh, even you or anyone might be tempted to have

a different mindset.

 

I added the bit you cut out to manipulate a poorly formed straw-man argument. 

 

54 minutes ago, placeholder said:

The Gates Foundation has been supporting the Family Planning arm of the Johns Hopkins Public Health division. But even if the Foundation was funding vaccine research, it would take a truly sad and conspiratorial mindset to believe that some of the most eminent people in the field would be taking some sort of bribe to suppress or misreport data. Your comment says a lot about your mindset and the mindset of anyone who likes it. Not so much about reality, though.

 

 

The key point here is:  [ But even if the Foundation was funding vaccine research, it would take a truly sad and conspiratorial mindset to believe that some of the most eminent people in the field would be taking some sort of bribe to suppress or misreport data ]

 

IF You [talatnut] truly believe those funding the research are taking bribes to suppress and misreport their research on vaccines it highlights that you too have a conspiratorial mindset and places you in the same brackets at the flat-earthers, moon landing and 9-11 conspiracists.... 

 

i.e. a little too wacky to entertain in intelligent and rational argument - just like the pigeon !! 

 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, MainBerry said:

 

My calculator broke, how did you come to 17 deaths per 100 million if 4,434 are reported to have died? VAERS is USA based and if you use actual numbers of today, it is 5888 deaths reported by VAERS and 145 million fully vaccinated in the USA. Please recalculate.

 

You're right. My bad arithmetic. It should be 17 out of 1 million. That article was dated May 12. At that date about 160 million Americans had received at least one shot of vaccine. So if you divide 1.8% by .0017% you get 1058. Which means, that even in the unlikely event that every one of those deaths was caused by the vaccine, it means that you are about 1000 times more likely to die if you are unvaccinated than not.  And as it can't be stressed often enough, deaths reported by the system in no way imply causation.

[placeholder]

19 minutes ago, talahtnut said:

Tut Tut, You did not read accurately, I said 'funds' JHU, not 'founds' JHU.

 

With the Gates Foundations' $20 million grant, total commitments to the

Johns Hopkins Initiative have reached $1.2 billion.

 

With that sort of doh, even you or anyone might be tempted to have

a different mindset.

You wrote the Gates foundation funds Johns Hopkins and failed to mention that it provides only a small part of their funding. 

On account of which fraction the scientists at  the Johns Hopkins epidemiological center are willing to sell out en masse? Is there something magic about Bill Gates money that differentiates it from others"?

 Too ridiculous.

[Tony125]

29 minutes ago, placeholder said:

You wrote the Gates foundation funds Johns Hopkins and failed to mention that it provides only a small part of their funding. 

On account of which fraction the scientists at  the Johns Hopkins epidemiological center are willing to sell out en masse? Is there something magic about Bill Gates money that differentiates it from others"?

 Too ridiculous.

AstraZeneca (AZN) COVID-19 Jab's New Side Effect Stated by EMA

 

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/astrazeneca-azn-covid-19-jabs-142302961.html

[talahtnut]

21 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I added the bit you cut out to manipulate a poorly formed straw-man argument. 

 

 

 

The key point here is:  [ But even if the Foundation was funding vaccine research, it would take a truly sad and conspiratorial mindset to believe that some of the most eminent people in the field would be taking some sort of bribe to suppress or misreport data ]

 

IF You [talatnut] truly believe those funding the research are taking bribes to suppress and misreport their research on vaccines it highlights that you too have a conspiratorial mindset and places you in the same brackets at the flat-earthers, moon landing and 9-11 conspiracists.... 

 

i.e. a little too wacky to entertain in intelligent and rational argument - just like the pigeon !! 

 

 

I did not say 'bribe' thats your interpretation, lets say, 'you don't bite the hand

that feeds you', that is not a conspiracy theory, its adult world common sense.

Only children believe in fair play and honesty.

 

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, talahtnut said:

 

I did not say 'bribe' thats your interpretation, lets say, 'you don't bite the hand

that feeds you', that is not a conspiracy theory, its adult world common sense.

Only children believe in fair play and honesty.

 

Maybe you don't bite the hand that feeds but it's ridiculous to suggest that an entire institution of high powered scientists are going to corrupt their data in order to allegedly advance the agenda of some 3rd parties. Ya don't think that their research is going to be questioned by other scientists? Or do you believe that Gates has all of them kowtowing to him? Do you think people get into science for the big bucks?

[GroveHillWanderer]

7 hours ago, MainBerry said:

OK, I get that, however, if I compare the death rates (listed as regards to the vaccine and not the stereotype "died in a car wrash while having covid" ????) in multiple countries, they all are about the same rate.

I'm not familiar with the Austrian and German systems but neither the US nor UK systems is intended to give an indication of what caused the events reported therein. Any person, no matter who can report that an event happened after a vaccination and these systems are simply designed to gather statistics that might give a signal that a particular type of adverse event needs further investigation.

 

For instance, the VAERS website gives the following disclaimer:

 

Quote

VAERS is not designed to determine if a vaccine caused a health problem, but is especially useful for detecting unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse event reporting that might indicate a possible safety problem with a vaccine. 

The UK's yellow card system also does not attribute a cause to any of the events (including deaths) that it contains.

 

Attribution of causality can only be determined (assuming that it ever is) after the relevant medical authorities have investigated the report(s).

[talahtnut]

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

Maybe you don't bite the hand that feeds but it's ridiculous to suggest that an entire institution of high powered scientists are going to corrupt their data in order to allegedly advance the agenda of some 3rd parties. Ya don't think that their research is going to be questioned by other scientists? Or do you believe that Gates has all of them kowtowing to him? Do you think people get into science for the big bucks?

In a word, yes, but of course not everyone.

Pfizer rolls out an experimental covid jab with no data, irresponsible or what, but

like you say, big bucks are involved for Gates.

Surely you must be aware of scientist and doctors disagreeing with each other,

certainly on covid matters. 

[brianthainess]

On 6/14/2021 at 5:55 PM, richard_smith237 said:

Also note: the family of anyone who dies shortly after taking the vaccine will want their 400,000 baht, there is every incentive for them to try and blame the vaccine !

Mmm wonder if they would pay out to a falang if his Thai wife died.

[Dogmatix]

On 6/14/2021 at 5:16 PM, Hepbub said:

We hear of these deaths, but no-one hears of any related illnesses which might have contributed to the death. My wife is terrified of getting the vaccine now because of these stories. people should be forced to print the results of how the person died. Not just "died after receiving the AZ jab". That is just scare mongering!

 

I don't think the authorities have admitted that anyone has died as a result of the vaccines.  They prefer to blame the victims, e.g. this one had diabetes, that one was obese etc.  But they screen everyone first and tell them the vaccine is safe for them.