Hillsong Church member, 34, dies of Covid after publicly speaking out against vaccine (yahoo.com)

[TLK Valentine]

Your right this guy had no faith, God provided ways but he refused it because he was sorely lacking in real faith.

I think of it as more lacking in humility... God can work His will through mundane means, including inspiring doctors to create a vaccine.

Some people, however, demand big flashy "miracles" -- a burning bush or manna from Heaven. They don't recognize God at work because they feel they're entitled to the Cecil B. DeMille treatment, with all the pomp and pageantry that goes with it.

 

[whatbogsends]

Hillsong Church member, 34, dies of Covid after publicly speaking out against vaccine (yahoo.com)

Amazing to me that people are willing to stick to their political beliefs and die rather than be vaccinated.

In this case, this person claimed his faith in God was greater than intubation and then in the end decided to be intubated. I'm just amazed he thought intubation was a better option than the vaccine. And then he died from it.

Ironically, all his advocating against the vaccine and then the way it all played out makes him a real-life cautionary tale that encourages vaccination.

And amazing further that his church doesn't feel any responsibility to advocate a pro-life stance but instead feels it's a "personal decision" for people to choose anti-life choices.

Thanks for the anecdote. Good to know that anecdotes are useful again in providing health care guidance (or, at the very least, shaming).

Here's an anecdote about a woman dying right after taking the vaccine, but, without an autopsy, the state was able to confirm that the vaccine wasn't the cause of death. The family paid for an autopsy, which contradicted a number of the states findings.

Keyes received a first dose of Pfizer vaccine Jan. 30 and died shortly after at VCU Tappahannock Hospital. A report documenting her case in the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System said she began having trouble breathing in the parking lot of her vaccination site about 20 minutes after getting the shot. She then began vomiting every 20 to 30 seconds.
...
The state’s investigation, which did not include an autopsy, ruled she died naturally — of complications arising from hypertensive cardiovascular disease and COVID-19, according to the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner. Other significant conditions, it said, were Type 2 diabetes, high cholesterol, obesity and hypoventilation syndrome, a breathing disorder.
...
In March, Jones said the family decided to get a private autopsy because the state did not perform one. At the time, her relatives hoped it would shed more light on what happened to Keyes, a church minister and supervisor for the Middle Peninsula Northern Neck Community Services Board.

“The examiner showed from the autopsy that there was a clot, bilateral pulmonary embolism, that they believe, in their medical opinion, resulted from medical treatment of the COVID vaccine, that led to her pulmonary edema,” she said. “And those were the direct cause of death.”

The private investigation, conducted by Epiarx Diagnostics, also took samples from multiple areas of Keyes’ respiratory tract, not just nasal pharyngeal swabs, Jones said. Those specimens showed negative results for COVID-19, from rapid and molecular PCR tests.
...
The Virginia Department of Health declined to say if, when or how its COVID-19 tests were performed, stating it was protected health information.

A Gloucester woman died after being vaccinated. A state investigation ruled she had COVID-19, but the family disagrees. - The Virginian-Pilot (pilotonline.com)

Did the woman have underlying health problems? Absolutely (as do the vast majority of Covid deaths).

Did the woman begin experiencing symptoms within minutes of receiving her vaccine? Absolutely.

Did the woman die within hours of receiving her vaccine? Absolutely.

Did the state perform an autopsy to identify the cause of death? No.

Was the cause of death related to the vaccine? Definitely not according to state examiners, but a private autopsy contradicted a number of the state's claims, including the state's claim of a positive Covid diagnosis.

Are these types of events from vaccines extremely rare? Absolutely, but what i find unsettling is the consistency in which, without examination, there is an almost immediate determination that it wasn't from the vaccine, despite the death literally occurring right after vaccination.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

What's that supposed to mean? Most don't die. Most don't hardly know they've come down ill.

"Most don't hardly know", huh?

I did not say that most die, I don't know where you're getting that from.

 

[cow451]

If you say so.

I do and correctly so.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

Thanks for the anecdote. Good to know that anecdotes are useful again in providing health care guidance (or, at the very least, shaming).

Not an anecdote. It's a news story - I provided the link to it. And no "health care guidance", so I'm not sure where you're getting that from. The points I made on the story have to do with Christian mores, so perhaps that's why you didn't grasp it.

Here's an anecdote about a woman dying [snip]

No thanks, not interested in your anecdote.

 

[MehGuy]

34 years.. a respectable lifespan for someone like a caveman.

 

[rturner76]

Thanks for the anecdote. Good to know that anecdotes are useful again in providing health care guidance (or, at the very least, shaming).

Here's an anecdote about a woman dying right after taking the vaccine, but, without an autopsy, the state was able to confirm that the vaccine wasn't the cause of death. The family paid for an autopsy, which contradicted a number of the states findings.

Keyes received a first dose of Pfizer vaccine Jan. 30 and died shortly after at VCU Tappahannock Hospital. A report documenting her case in the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System said she began having trouble breathing in the parking lot of her vaccination site about 20 minutes after getting the shot. She then began vomiting every 20 to 30 seconds.
...
The state’s investigation, which did not include an autopsy, ruled she died naturally — of complications arising from hypertensive cardiovascular disease and COVID-19, according to the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner. Other significant conditions, it said, were Type 2 diabetes, high cholesterol, obesity and hypoventilation syndrome, a breathing disorder.
...
In March, Jones said the family decided to get a private autopsy because the state did not perform one. At the time, her relatives hoped it would shed more light on what happened to Keyes, a church minister and supervisor for the Middle Peninsula Northern Neck Community Services Board.

“The examiner showed from the autopsy that there was a clot, bilateral pulmonary embolism, that they believe, in their medical opinion, resulted from medical treatment of the COVID vaccine, that led to her pulmonary edema,” she said. “And those were the direct cause of death.”

The private investigation, conducted by Epiarx Diagnostics, also took samples from multiple areas of Keyes’ respiratory tract, not just nasal pharyngeal swabs, Jones said. Those specimens showed negative results for COVID-19, from rapid and molecular PCR tests.
...
The Virginia Department of Health declined to say if, when or how its COVID-19 tests were performed, stating it was protected health information.

A Gloucester woman died after being vaccinated. A state investigation ruled she had COVID-19, but the family disagrees. - The Virginian-Pilot (pilotonline.com)

Did the woman have underlying health problems? Absolutely (as do the vast majority of Covid deaths).

Did the woman begin experiencing symptoms within minutes of receiving her vaccine? Absolutely.

Did the woman die within hours of receiving her vaccine? Absolutely.

Did the state perform an autopsy to identify the cause of death? No.

Was the cause of death related to the vaccine? Definitely not according to state examiners, but a private autopsy contradicted a number of the state's claims, including the state's claim of a positive Covid diagnosis.

Are these types of events from vaccines extremely rare? Absolutely, but what i find unsettling is the consistency in which, without examination, there is an almost immediate determination that it wasn't from the vaccine, despite the death literally occurring right after vaccination.

Sounds like she was riddled with disease and already had COVID. Should of got the vaccine sooner and maybe she would of lived. Or just died from a heart attack anyway

 

[whatbogsends]

Sounds like she was riddled with disease and already had COVID. Should of got the vaccine sooner and maybe she would of lived. Or just died from a heart attack anyway

Re-read the article. Better yet, google the story and read other articles on her death. The only confirmed COVID tests that were done were negative. The only autopsy that was done was requested and paid for by the family and the results contradicted the claims made by the state health care officials.

Those who defend vaccines at all costs also seem to believe in extreme coincidences - that her heart attack just happened to start 20 minutes after receiving her vaccine. It's amazing how many stories there are where problem "just happen" to start right after the vaccine, and the official conclusion, without an autopsy or investigation is "it wasn't the vaccine". Making claims like that without evidence isn't "following the science".

 

[pitabread]

Those who defend vaccines at all costs also seem to believe in extreme coincidences - that her heart attack just happened to start 20 minutes after receiving her vaccine. It's amazing how many stories there are where problem "just happen" to start right after the vaccine, and the official conclusion, without an autopsy or investigation is "it wasn't the vaccine". Making claims like that without evidence isn't "following the science".

Keep in mind though that people do die for various reasons all the time. And when you have a substantial portion of the population receiving vaccines, there will be some coincidental deaths that follow vaccinations. That's just a statistical reality.

While that may or may not be what happened in this particular case, without an autopsy, it's hard to confirm either way.

 

[whatbogsends]

Keep in mind though that people do die for various reasons all the time. And when you have a substantial portion of the population receiving vaccines, there will be some coincidental deaths that follow vaccinations. That's just a statistical reality.

While that may or may not be what happened in this particular case, without an autopsy, it's hard to confirm either way.

There was an autopsy, paid for by the family, which contradicted the claims made by the state health officials.

The only people who made claims without an autopsy were the state officials, who also refused to do an autopsy at the request of the family.

As far as "people do die for various reasons all the time", why isn't that a consideration when calculating Covid deaths? In some places (such as Oregon), a positive test for Covid and dying is all that it takes to be counted as a Covid death. Shouldn't the same rigor be applied (in fact, the reason there was even a story about this was that people who died clearly from a non-Covid condition complained about their loved ones being incorrectly counted as Covid deaths) there?

 

[durangodawood]

Keep in mind though that people do die for various reasons all the time. And when you have a substantial portion of the population receiving vaccines, there will be some coincidental deaths that follow vaccinations. That's just a statistical reality.....

People are terrible at statistical literacy.

Plus, we each tend to rate individual stories higher, probably for emotional reasons.

The combination is deadly for decision making.

 

[pitabread]

As far as "people do die for various reasons all the time", why isn't that a consideration when calculating Covid deaths? In some places (such as Oregon), a positive test for Covid and dying is all that it takes to be counted as a Covid death. Shouldn't the same rigor be applied (in fact, the reason there was even a story about this was that people who died clearly from a non-Covid condition complained about their loved ones being incorrectly counted as Covid deaths) there?

Admittedly COVID-19 death counts are imperfect, although that goes both ways. There have been various studies on relative excess deaths and there is no doubt the pandemic has caused an increase in mortality.

 

[whatbogsends]

People are terrible at statistical literacy.

Plus, we each tend to rate individual stories higher, probably for emotional reasons.

The combination is deadly for decision making.

The stories are showing why the data is untrustworthy, when we can cite instance after instance in which deaths immediately following a vaccination are discounted as possible vaccine deaths without any sort of investigation.

Those who are blindly repeating the claims of the CDC aren't showing their mastery of statistical literacy - the actual data and statistics aren't available. What is being presented is the CDC's interpretation of said data, with events, such as the one highlighted in my story, not even counted in their data, as their assessment, without even performing an autopsy, was "not related".

Meanwhile, cancer deaths in Oregon were counted as Covid deaths, and there's not even a hint of concern by the "follow the science" crowd.

McCrary said her dad died from advanced cancer and Avamere considered Creasy recovered from the coronavirus. A few days after his death, Lincoln County Public Health reported Creasy as the county’s ninth COVID-19 death.

“I mean, that’s not what he died from. He died from colon cancer, not COVID and places are listing loved ones as COVID deaths. And they're labeling that and it's just not true,” said McCrary.
...
Other families across Oregon are also questioning why their loved ones are being counted as COVID-19 deaths, including the family of a 26-year-old Oregon man who was listed as a COVID-19 death but tested negative for the virus.

According to the Oregon Health Authority (OHA), there is no difference when it comes to tracking and reporting COVID deaths. OHA spokesman Jonathan Modie explained in an email how the state determines what is counted as a COVID-19 death:

We consider COVID-19 deaths to be:

Deaths in which a patient hospitalized for any reason within 14 days of a positive COVID-19 test result dies in the hospital or within the 60 days following discharge.

Dying with COVID and dying from COVID are same thing in Oregon | kgw.com

If the data used as the basis for statistics is unreliable, so will the resulting analysis. Garbage in, garbage out.

 

[whatbogsends]

Admittedly COVID-19 death counts are imperfect, although that goes both ways. There have been various studies on relative excess deaths and there is no doubt the pandemic has caused an increase in mortality.

Yes, the pandemic has caused an increase in mortality. A significant portion of that excess mortality can be directly attributed to Covid.

However, they are still studying the full breadth of causes of excess mortality, and a non-insignificant (some studies claimed as high as 35% within a time/location context, although i'd wager the actual number is somewhat less) portion of those excess deaths were indirect results of the pandemic and responses to the pandemic, with a major reason being people not seeking the health care they normally would have had there not been a pandemic (for various reasons, including, but not limited to out of fear of catching Covid and health care facilities not being able to support their full range of services).

 

[durangodawood]

The stories are showing why the data is untrustworthy, when we can cite instance after instance in which deaths immediately following a vaccination are discounted as possible vaccine deaths without any sort of investigation.

Those who are blindly repeating the claims of the CDC aren't showing their mastery of statistical literacy - the actual data and statistics aren't available. What is being presented is the CDC's interpretation of said data, with events, such as the one highlighted in my story, not even counted in their data, as their assessment, without even performing an autopsy, was "not related".

Meanwhile, cancer deaths in Oregon were counted as Covid deaths, and there's not even a hint of concern by the "follow the science" crowd.

McCrary said her dad died from advanced cancer and Avamere considered Creasy recovered from the coronavirus. A few days after his death, Lincoln County Public Health reported Creasy as the county’s ninth COVID-19 death.

“I mean, that’s not what he died from. He died from colon cancer, not COVID and places are listing loved ones as COVID deaths. And they're labeling that and it's just not true,” said McCrary.
...
Other families across Oregon are also questioning why their loved ones are being counted as COVID-19 deaths, including the family of a 26-year-old Oregon man who was listed as a COVID-19 death but tested negative for the virus.

According to the Oregon Health Authority (OHA), there is no difference when it comes to tracking and reporting COVID deaths. OHA spokesman Jonathan Modie explained in an email how the state determines what is counted as a COVID-19 death:

We consider COVID-19 deaths to be:

Deaths in which a patient hospitalized for any reason within 14 days of a positive COVID-19 test result dies in the hospital or within the 60 days following discharge.

Dying with COVID and dying from COVID are same thing in Oregon | kgw.com

If the data used as the basis for statistics is unreliable, so will the resulting analysis. Garbage in, garbage out.

Unless youre going to personally spend full time weeks and weeks personally chasing down the facts behind articles like the one above, as well as the facts of the larger context, youre just left with the question: who should I trust more.

 

[whatbogsends]

Unless youre going to personally spend full time weeks and weeks personally chasing down the facts behind articles like the one above, as well as the facts of the larger context, youre just left with the question: who should I trust more.

I certainly don't trust the FDA or pharmaceutical companies. If they were trustworthy, we wouldn't have this history:

From 2009:

In the largest health care fraud settlement in history, pharmaceutical giant Pfizer must pay $2.3 billion to resolve criminal and civil allegations that the company illegally promoted uses of four of its drugs, including the painkiller Bextra, the U.S. Department of Justice announced Wednesday.

Pfizer fined $2.3 billion for illegal marketing in off-label drug case - ABC News (go.com)

But Pfizer learned their lesson there, and was an upstanding public entity since then, right?

Oh, wait.

From 2020:

Three major drug distributors and the pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson have agreed to a $26 billion settlement with states to resolve thousands of lawsuits over the country's opioid crisis, officials announced Wednesday.
...
“This was a person-made crisis," Pennsylvania attorney general Josh Shapiro said at a press conference announcing the settlement. "This epidemic was manufactured by an army of pharmaceutical executives.”
...
As part of the settlement, Pfizer PFE will pay a criminal fine of $1.195 billion, the largest criminal fine ever imposed in the USA for any matter, according to the Justice Department. Pharmacia & Upjohn must pay a $105 million criminal fine.

4 drug companies agree to pay $26 billion to resolve opioid lawsuits (nbcnews.com)

The CDCs actions over the last year and a half put their trustworthiness in question as well. If they wanted to instill trust, there would be full transparency of data, and they'd spend more time putting forth data and information than trying to control the narrative.

 

[durangodawood]

I certainly don't trust the FDA or pharmaceutical companies. If they were trustworthy, we wouldn't have this history:

From 2009:

In the largest health care fraud settlement in history, pharmaceutical giant Pfizer must pay $2.3 billion to resolve criminal and civil allegations that the company illegally promoted uses of four of its drugs, including the painkiller Bextra, the U.S. Department of Justice announced Wednesday.

Pfizer fined $2.3 billion for illegal marketing in off-label drug case - ABC News (go.com)

But Pfizer learned their lesson there, and was an upstanding public entity since then, right?

Oh, wait.

From 2020:

Three major drug distributors and the pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson have agreed to a $26 billion settlement with states to resolve thousands of lawsuits over the country's opioid crisis, officials announced Wednesday.
...
“This was a person-made crisis," Pennsylvania attorney general Josh Shapiro said at a press conference announcing the settlement. "This epidemic was manufactured by an army of pharmaceutical executives.”
...
As part of the settlement, Pfizer PFE will pay a criminal fine of $1.195 billion, the largest criminal fine ever imposed in the USA for any matter, according to the Justice Department. Pharmacia & Upjohn must pay a $105 million criminal fine.

4 drug companies agree to pay $26 billion to resolve opioid lawsuits (nbcnews.com)

The CDCs actions over the last year and a half put their trustworthiness in question as well. If they wanted to instill trust, there would be full transparency of data, and they'd spend more time putting forth data and information than trying to control the narrative.

I agree about the pharma companies. Except lets not forget that the opioids were all really useful drugs and the criminality was all around their marketing and distribution. And I dont think the CDC had much at all to do with that issue. Your first article is about off label marketing which means it was for a use not even approved by the regulating authorities.

I know hardly anybody at all whos willing to do their own proper research, rather than fake cherry-picked social media algorithm mediated "research" on this topic. I'm not. In this environment Im going with the public health institutions as on balance the best source of information.

 

[dzheremi]

The basic lack of relation between how a state chooses to count deaths during the pandemic and the results of criminal proceedings against drug companies which would later be involved in manufacturing Covid vaccines should not go unnoticed. In fact, I would go so far as to question what good it would do to have "full transparency of data" present before a public that shows itself to be given to relying on or manufacturing such improper connections. (cf "If the data used as the basis for statistics is unreliable, so will the resulting analysis.")

 

[whatbogsends]

I agree about the pharma companies. Except lets not forget that the opioids were all really useful drugs and the criminality was all around their marketing and distribution. And I dont think the CDC had much at all to do with that issue. Your first article is about off label marketing which means it was for a use not even approved by the regulating authorities.

I know hardly anybody at all whos willing to do their own proper research, rather than fake cherry-picked social media algorithm mediated "research" on this topic. I'm not. In this environment Im going with the public health institutions as on balance the best source of information.

I'm not attributing sinister motivation for lack of transparency (other than perhaps pharmaceutical companies being profit-driven), but my read is that they're more interested in pushing an agenda and are willing to sacrifice transparency and honesty to achieve that agenda. I understand that the agenda is trying to advocate the vaccine to impede the spread of Covid (and i wholly support measures which impede the spread of Covid), but their approach appears to be somewhat myopic.

 

[pitabread]

Yes, the pandemic has caused an increase in mortality. A significant portion of that excess mortality can be directly attributed to Covid.

However, they are still studying the full breadth of causes of excess mortality, and a non-insignificant (some studies claimed as high as 35% within a time/location context, although i'd wager the actual number is somewhat less) portion of those excess deaths were indirect results of the pandemic and responses to the pandemic, with a major reason being people not seeking the health care they normally would have had there not been a pandemic (for various reasons, including, but not limited to out of fear of catching Covid and health care facilities not being able to support their full range of services).

Oh there are absolutely additional fatalities as an indirect result of the pandemic. This has been known, especially in cases where health services have had to ration care due to surge in patients.

This just reinforced the importance of nipping things in the bud as early as possible. Unfortunately that didn't happen in many places.