Popular Post stats Posted January 17 Popular Post Share Posted January 17 Since their introduction in December 2020, COVID-19 vaccines have reduced deaths due to the pandemic by at least 57%, saving more than 1.4 million lives in the WHO European Region. Most of those saved were aged 60 or older, the group at highest risk of severe illness and death from the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The first vaccine booster alone saved 700 000 lives. These are among the findings of a new WHO/Europe study revealing that today’s known COVID-19 death toll in the Region, currently at 2.5 million, might be as high as 4 million without the vaccines. “We have constantly stressed the importance of the COVID-19 vaccines, particularly for older people and the most vulnerable. This study documents the result of countries implementing that advice. The evidence is irrefutable,” said Dr Hans Henri P. Kluge, WHO Regional Director for Europe. Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, the Region, covering 53 Member States across Europe and central Asia, has seen more than 277 million confirmed cases and over 2.5 million recorded deaths. (more) https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/16-01-2024-covid-19-vaccinations-have-saved-more-than-1.4-million-lives-in-the-who-european-region--a-new-study-finds Our study findings highlight that even during the Omicron period, when the severity of infections decreased relative to earlier periods of previous VOC circulation (10), COVID-19 vaccines still dramatically reduced mortality. We found that most lives were saved (67%) during the Omicron period, the longest VOC period, when Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 began to circulate widely despite already high vaccination coverage. Widespread infections occurred during the Omicron period likely due to a combination of lack of immunity, waning immunity against infection and a highly transmissible virus. ... We found the highest impact of vaccine was in adults ≥60 years-old, with 96% of all COVID-19 deaths averted by vaccine in 34 CAT occurred in this age group, even though only 27% of reported infections in adults occurred in people in this age group. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.12.24301206v1 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
save the frogs Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 some people still believe in the Easter Bunny man. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Phoenix Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 A recent peer-reviewed study of public covid data in six northern European countries (prof Norman FENTON being on of the several authors) has discovered that the pre-existing seasonal nature of coronaviruses had more impact on reported covid ‘case’ and ‘death’ numbers than any of the government public health interventions – including vaccinations, lockdowns, masks and travel restrictions. The scientific study was published in the peer-reviewed, Journal of Clinical Medicine. > https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/13/2/334#B104-jcm-13-00334 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 Some caveats of the study cited in the prior post: 1. their assumptions based on the seasonality of COVID weren't based on COVID itself, but instead, on the trends of OTHER non-COVID coronaviruses "(using the average incidence of endemic human beta-coronaviruses in Sweden over a 10-year period as a proxy)" Hmmm.... "These four coronaviruses (two alpha-coronaviruses and two beta-coronaviruses) have been suggested to be responsible for 10–15% of “common cold” cases and demonstrate a strong seasonality. Given that COVID-19 is caused by a human beta-coronavirus, we suggest that, if it also has a seasonal component, it might be similar to the seasonality of these endemic beta-coronaviruses (HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1). [emphasis added] 2. And then, as their own conclusion section notes: "our results should be interpreted in light of the possibility of the so-called “ecological fallacy”. That is, the results at a population level for each of the six countries might potentially mask significant effects at an individual level." 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post eisfeld Posted January 18 Popular Post Share Posted January 18 1 hour ago, Red Phoenix said: A recent peer-reviewed study of public covid data in six northern European countries (prof Norman FENTON being on of the several authors) has discovered that the pre-existing seasonal nature of coronaviruses had more impact on reported covid ‘case’ and ‘death’ numbers than any of the government public health interventions – including vaccinations, lockdowns, masks and travel restrictions. The scientific study was published in the peer-reviewed, Journal of Clinical Medicine. > https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/13/2/334 Once again a low quality suspect study from you. It was published in an open-access journal with extraordinarily low Impact Factor of less than 5 which measures the number of citations the papers in the journal get. 5 basically means "garbage". The "Journal of Clinical Medicine" is a pay-to-play journal meaning that they aceept pretty much anything as long as the authors pay for it. Why would the authors pay for it? Hm let's look at who funded this. The study discloses "G.A.Q.’s, R.C.’s and W.S.’s contributions were partly funded by the Center for Environmental Research and Earth Sciences (CERES)". Who Is behind CERES? It is a man called Willie Wei-Hock Soon who is a climate change denier and has published widely debunked research. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willie_Soon MDPI who owns the "Journal of Clinical Medicine" is known as a garbage publisher with predatory business model. Quote MDPI's business model is based on establishing entirely open access broad-discipline journals, with fast processing times from submission to publication and article processing charges paid by the author.[6] MDPI's business practices have attracted controversy, with critics suggesting it sacrifices editorial and academic rigor in favor of operational speed and business interest. ... Some journals published by MDPI have also been noted by the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Norwegian Scientific Publication Register, two major scientific bodies, for lack of rigour and possible predatory practice Wikipedia on them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDPI A truly impressive roster of controversies and scandals. The co-author Norman Fenton that you seem to point out (why? he was not a primary author) has a history of anti-vaxx conspiracy theories. The study was not accepted by any reputable journal. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stats Posted January 18 Author Share Posted January 18 An off-topic diversion post with a disallowed private party social media video has been removed, along with an ensuing reply. Forum rules: "in factual areas such as but not limited to news, current affairs and health topics, social media cannot be used unless it is from a credible news media source or a government agency, and must include a link to the original source." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabas Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 (edited) 4 hours ago, Red Phoenix said: A recent peer-reviewed study of public covid data in six northern European countries (prof Norman FENTON being on of the several authors) has discovered that the pre-existing seasonal nature of coronaviruses had more impact on reported covid ‘case’ and ‘death’ numbers than any of the government public health interventions – including vaccinations, lockdowns, masks and travel restrictions. The scientific study was published in the peer-reviewed, Journal of Clinical Medicine. > https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/13/2/334#B104-jcm-13-00334 The abstract clearly states: However, these results are correlations and not causations." Well, of course... New deadly crossover viruses like Spanish Flu and SARS-2 do not follow seasonality as they mutate wildly driving multiple out of season waves. They are not yet humanized as falsely claimed. To further their illusion, they chose six geographically contiguous countries in northern Europe that shared variants, which appear partially seasonal because the countries share deep winters. The illusion becomes complete as there will always be some seasonality. A bit like a half lie. As for the rest of the world, what seasonality? Peaks followed mutations. Wait, the huge Omicron peak did occur in Dec-Jan but oops, Omicron came from South Africa where it was the dead of summer. Worse, as it moved to the northern hemisphere it slipped out of season there. Edited January 18 by stats graphs lacking required weblinks removed 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabas Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 1 hour ago, rabas said: The abstract clearly states: However, these results are correlations and not causations." Well, of course... New deadly crossover viruses like Spanish Flu and SARS-2 do not follow seasonality as they mutate wildly driving multiple out of season waves. They are not yet humanized as falsely claimed. To further their illusion, they chose six geographically contiguous countries in northern Europe that shared variants, which appear partially seasonal because the countries share deep winters. The illusion becomes complete as there will always be some seasonality. A bit like a half lie. As for the rest of the world, what seasonality? Peaks followed mutations. Wait, the huge Omicron peak did occur in Dec-Jan but oops, Omicron came from South Africa where it was the dead of summer. Worse, as it moved to the northern hemisphere it slippedout of season there. Graphs for above post showing global out of season SARS-2-Cov waves with links. https://ourworldindata.org/covid-cases https://ourworldindata.org/covid-cases 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 9 hours ago, eisfeld said: Once again a low quality suspect study from you. It was published in an open-access journal with extraordinarily low Impact Factor of less than 5 which measures the number of citations the papers in the journal get. 5 basically means "garbage". The "Journal of Clinical Medicine" is a pay-to-play journal meaning that they aceept pretty much anything as long as the authors pay for it. Why would the authors pay for it? Hm let's look at who funded this. The study discloses "G.A.Q.’s, R.C.’s and W.S.’s contributions were partly funded by the Center for Environmental Research and Earth Sciences (CERES)". Who Is behind CERES? It is a man called Willie Wei-Hock Soon who is a climate change denier and has published widely debunked research. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willie_Soon MDPI who owns the "Journal of Clinical Medicine" is known as a garbage publisher with predatory business model. Wikipedia on them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDPI A truly impressive roster of controversies and scandals. The co-author Norman Fenton that you seem to point out (why? he was not a primary author) has a history of anti-vaxx conspiracy theories. The study was not accepted by any reputable journal. I believe in vaccinations and masking. My opinion is based on scientific research, using my eyes and common sense. Others do not, their prerogative. If only some credible research would support their position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impulse Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 On 1/17/2024 at 11:18 PM, stats said: We found the highest impact of vaccine was in adults ≥60 years-old, with 96% of all COVID-19 deaths averted by vaccine in 34 CAT occurred in this age group, even though only 27% of reported infections in adults occurred in people in this age group. Yet many still want you to vax your kids, in the complete absence of data about long term side effects. Because collecting that data requires a long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 (edited) Because... 1: even though COVID deaths among young people are relatively rare, COVID even now is still causing a lot of hospitalizations and health problems among the young... example from the U.S. last September: "a new analysis of federal data from the American Academy of Pediatrics showed hospital admissions among children are rising faster than average. Nearly 1,200 children were admitted to the hospital with Covid-19 during the week ending September 9, marking a five-fold increase over the past three months. Hospitalizations among adults increased about three-fold in that same time period. Admissions among children remain below previous pandemic peaks. There were about 1,800 new pediatric admissions in a week at the height of last winter’s wave, and more than 6,500 weekly admissions during Omicron, the AAP analysis shows. Children accounted for 6% of all Covid-19 hospital admissions during the week ending September 9, federal data shows. And children under 5 were the most at risk, with about half of all pediatric Covid-19 hospitalizations among those younger than 5, according to the AAP analysis." https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/22/health/covid-hospitalizations-seniors-kids-vaccines/index.html And 2: the history of vaccines over decades has shown that any vaccine related side effects happen shortly after vaccination -- not many months or years later. So experts in the field discount the anti-vaxer claims about some potential future harms. Plus right now, we're already three-plus years into the global COVID vaccination program with more than 12 billion total doses administered. 5 Reasons We Know The COVID-19 Vaccines Don't Have Long-Term Health Effects "“The only long-term effect of the COVID-19 vaccines is survival,” says Dr. Cunningham. “There are no adverse long-term effects to worry about. Contracting COVID-19, however, can leave you with lingering health problems.” ... 1. History has showed us that with vaccines, adverse effects occur within eight weeks of vaccination—not years later. ... Neither mRNA technology—nor viral vector technology—is new. ... The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were created using messenger RNA (or mRNA) technology, which has been used for about 10 years in cancer treatment, with no long-term effects detected." https://www.henryford.com/blog/2022/02/5-reasons-we-know-the-covid-vaccines-dont-have-longterm-effects Edited January 19 by TallGuyJohninBKK 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now