The Opening Post is disingenuous.
Um, kind of hard to separate the “opening post” from the “opening poster” – they are in fact one in the same so, kudos for so
deftly impugning my honesty! (The
top two synonyms for disingenuous being
deceitful and
dishonest)
One, on one hand, it is presented as about the Covid vaccine but the numbers are off all vaccines in that time.
Two, and most inportant, the data on VAERS is being misused or misunderstood. If one is going to use VAERS, then it would be wise to read the Data Use Guide first.
< snip >
My advice is to research in actual academic and official sites, find out how to interpret the data (ad in the Data User Guide) , and refrain from conspiracy sites, or listening to an armchair 'expert's' interpretation.
First, if you read any of the earlier posts, you’d know we dealt conclusively with any issues about the kinds of vaccines in the data. I made it patently and unequivocally clear the data was about ALL VACCINES – I repeated this three (3) separate times in fact – in the very OP (that I wrote) that you’re so rashly dissing.
Second, if you had read any of those earlier posts you’d also realize we’d dealt conclusively as well about the nature of the data in the VAERS database – INCLUDING the VAERS guide about how to use the data – which I also acknowledged.
In other words, you’ve managed to completely miss the point – so these little barbs are having no impact. I’m sorry to say that, but I find their repetition rather insipid at this point. They have already been made, and addressed, and properly dismissed, many posts ago.
But since you, and perhaps others missed it, I’ll repeat the point – the VAERS database has been collecting data from vaccine providers for over 30 years now; all manner of data. I focused on two aspects of it – the number of reports and the number of reported deaths. For 30 years the number of reported “events” (ALL events) has varied from about 12,000 in 1990 to about 50,000 in 2020. For 30 years the reported number of “death events” after receiving a vaccine has been on average about 150 a year +/-. With me so far?
Causation? Correlation? An unchanged variable in interpretation of the data throughout all years of the data.
In the
first 4 months of 2021 (this is a correction as I thought the data included the month of May, but it only went to May 1), the number of reported “events” jumped
ten-fold from the previous year, from ~50k to almost 500k. The number of reported “death events” jumped
forty-fold from the annual average of ~150 to nearly 6,000. These are statistically significant increases; but extrapolate those numbers out to the end of this year by tripling them (4 months x 3 = 12) and you get some
very significant numbers.
NO ONE can deny the fact that these numbers are statistically significant. No one.
But significant to what conclusion? Isn't that the real point here?
My conclusion in the OP? “
I find this data very sobering.”
Make of that what you will but that is as far as I went. Did I draw any other conclusions than “sobering?” No. Does the thread title or the first paragraph in the OP infer anything other than “sobering?” No. Did I ever assert the data suggested the deaths reported were due to COVID? No.
THAT said, I unequivocally reassert the fact that these data are
undeniably statistically significant – and sobering. I don't care what spin is put on it, or by whom. This fact is undeniable.
But let the reader draw their own conclusion as to their significance.
As to your unsolicited “advice” about refraining from “
conspiracy sites, or listening to an armchair ‘expert’s’ interpretation” of this topic, I can assure you I went to no such places; didn’t cite them, didn’t reference them, in fact – I even made it explicitly clear I was doing this entirely on my own. I don’t even know which sites or ‘experts’ they are to which you’re referring – do you; maybe you can enlighten me?
Do I deny the existence of COVID? No. Do I deny its seriousness? No. Do I deny people have both died and suffered long term consequences from contracting it? No. Do I minimize that in any way, shape or form? No.
Do I deny the statistical significance of the VAERS data? No. But it's apparent you and several others here do. Why? I can't begin to guess.
Since we’re giving advice, let me give you a little of my own – the next time you feel compelled to impugn the honesty of or make rash and hasty judgments about another member of this site or their posts – and I say this with all due respect and consideration for your position here - maybe take a few minutes to first consider the appropriateness of such behavior.
