TOPIC: Try discussing here....

Josh M. wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9756975/CDC-launches-investigation-healthy-boy-dies-three-days-receiving-second-Covid-vaccine.html

Thanks for pointing out how safe it is. Of millions vaccinated one person died in a way that might not even be related, and the CDC is still launching a full investigation into it just in case.

+1

Brad Mortensen wrote:

Josh M. wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9756975/CDC-launches-investigation-healthy-boy-dies-three-days-receiving-second-Covid-vaccine.html

Thanks for pointing out how safe it is. Of millions vaccinated one person died in a way that might not even be related, and the CDC is still launching a full investigation into it just in case.

No, not just one…

newsroom.heart.org/news/cdc-investigating-rare-myocarditis-in-teens-young-adults-covid-19-vaccine-still-advised-for-all-who-are-eligible

And I’d point out the previous posts where people said the exact opposite when it came to the very low number of kids dying from COVID “it’s not a low number if it’s your child…”

Sorry Brad - there aren't any confirmed cases so "not only one" isn't factually correct. If a causal relationship is found, then that statement can be corrected. At present, there are zero cases of anyone dying from a Covid vaccine in the US other than the 3 J&J cases and all suspicious deaths around the time of vaccination are investigated.

Ironically, the heart condition you mentioned - the single largest cause of serious cases of Myocarditis in the US is Covid-19 for unvaccinated individuals. Pre-Covid, it was the common cold, parvoviruses (spelling?), and GI infections. That's why doctors recommend vaccination to avoid this.

www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/myocarditis/symptoms-causes/syc-20352539

Fred

All issues should absolutely be looked into and an informed decision should be made. Implying that vaccination injury is more dangerous than the disease is completely inaccurate though, empirically. The death rate is considerable higher for covid than the vaccine, we have the data to show that. Some people are more worried about the vaccine because it seems more immediate while covid seems more remote, and I get that, but it doesn't mean the numbers support that fear. I think Ben Franklin actually said it really well when he lost a child to a preventable disease, because he chose not to vaccinate for fear of vaccine injury (which was a much bigger risk back then):

"In 1736 I lost one of my sons, a fine boy of four years old, by the small-pox, taken in the common way. I long regretted bitterly, and still regret that I had not given it to him by inoculation. This I mention for the sake of parents who omit that operation, on the supposition that they should never forgive themselves if a child died under it; my example showing that the regret may be the same either way, and that, therefore, the safer should be chosen."

Humans are absolutely terrible at risk assessment. It's why we spend so much money on counterterrorism and so comparatively little on dealing with risks that are actually likely to touch our lives. We respond much more strongly to sad or scary anecdotes than we do to raw numbers and probability.

Josh M. wrote: All issues should absolutely be looked into and an informed decision should be made. Implying that vaccination injury is more dangerous than the disease is completely inaccurate though, empirically. The death rate is considerable higher for covid than the vaccine, we have the data to show that. Some people are more worried about the vaccine because it seems more immediate while covid seems more remote, and I get that, but it doesn't mean the numbers support that fear. I think Ben Franklin actually said it really well when he lost a child to a preventable disease, because he chose not to vaccinate for fear of vaccine injury (which was a much bigger risk back then):

"In 1736 I lost one of my sons, a fine boy of four years old, by the small-pox, taken in the common way. I long regretted bitterly, and still regret that I had not given it to him by inoculation. This I mention for the sake of parents who omit that operation, on the supposition that they should never forgive themselves if a child died under it; my example showing that the regret may be the same either way, and that, therefore, the safer should be chosen."

Humans are absolutely terrible at risk assessment. It's why we spend so much money on counterterrorism and so comparatively little on dealing with risks that are actually likely to touch our lives. We respond much more strongly to sad or scary anecdotes than we do to raw numbers and probability.

+1

Fred K wrote:

Josh M. wrote: All issues should absolutely be looked into and an informed decision should be made. Implying that vaccination injury is more dangerous than the disease is completely inaccurate though, empirically. The death rate is considerable higher for covid than the vaccine, we have the data to show that. Some people are more worried about the vaccine because it seems more immediate while covid seems more remote, and I get that, but it doesn't mean the numbers support that fear. I think Ben Franklin actually said it really well when he lost a child to a preventable disease, because he chose not to vaccinate for fear of vaccine injury (which was a much bigger risk back then):

"In 1736 I lost one of my sons, a fine boy of four years old, by the small-pox, taken in the common way. I long regretted bitterly, and still regret that I had not given it to him by inoculation. This I mention for the sake of parents who omit that operation, on the supposition that they should never forgive themselves if a child died under it; my example showing that the regret may be the same either way, and that, therefore, the safer should be chosen."

Humans are absolutely terrible at risk assessment. It's why we spend so much money on counterterrorism and so comparatively little on dealing with risks that are actually likely to touch our lives. We respond much more strongly to sad or scary anecdotes than we do to raw numbers and probability.

+1

+2

The problem is that speculation isn't data, and that is what was being done. People should listen to their physicians and medical experts, as those two sources would be providing data. If your doctor says don't get the shot, don't take it. If a story about one possibly bad outcome is going to keep people from protecting themselves, friends, and family, then people would never take any medications.

See...isn't this a better place for everyone to do this. Glad it's not clogging up everyone else's topics.

Adam Guay wrote: See...isn't this a better place for everyone to do this. Glad it's not clogging up everyone else's topics.

Eh, if it comes up elsewhere I don't mind.

Josh M. wrote: All issues should absolutely be looked into and an informed decision should be made. Implying that vaccination injury is more dangerous than the disease is completely inaccurate though, empirically. The death rate is considerable higher for covid than the vaccine, we have the data to show that. Some people are more worried about the vaccine because it seems more immediate while covid seems more remote, and I get that, but it doesn't mean the numbers support that fear. I think Ben Franklin actually said it really well when he lost a child to a preventable disease, because he chose not to vaccinate for fear of vaccine injury (which was a much bigger risk back then):

"In 1736 I lost one of my sons, a fine boy of four years old, by the small-pox, taken in the common way. I long regretted bitterly, and still regret that I had not given it to him by inoculation. This I mention for the sake of parents who omit that operation, on the supposition that they should never forgive themselves if a child died under it; my example showing that the regret may be the same either way, and that, therefore, the safer should be chosen."

Humans are absolutely terrible at risk assessment. It's why we spend so much money on counterterrorism and so comparatively little on dealing with risks that are actually likely to touch our lives. We respond much more strongly to sad or scary anecdotes than we do to raw numbers and probability.

Great quote! Thanks!

+3

PopCon (taking place at the ICC this weekend) announced yesterday that the ICC won't be requiring masks for vaccinated individuals. While smaller than a normal GenCon, it has been around the size that GC is limiting attendance to this year. I'll be curious to see how this plays out, and whether it winds up having any impact on GenCon.

Josh M. wrote: All issues should absolutely be looked into and an informed decision should be made. Implying that vaccination injury is more dangerous than the disease is completely inaccurate though, empirically. The death rate is considerable higher for covid than the vaccine, we have the data to show that. Some people are more worried about the vaccine because it seems more immediate while covid seems more remote, and I get that, but it doesn't mean the numbers support that fear. I think Ben Franklin actually said it really well when he lost a child to a preventable disease, because he chose not to vaccinate for fear of vaccine injury (which was a much bigger risk back then):

"In 1736 I lost one of my sons, a fine boy of four years old, by the small-pox, taken in the common way. I long regretted bitterly, and still regret that I had not given it to him by inoculation. This I mention for the sake of parents who omit that operation, on the supposition that they should never forgive themselves if a child died under it; my example showing that the regret may be the same either way, and that, therefore, the safer should be chosen."

Humans are absolutely terrible at risk assessment. It's why we spend so much money on counterterrorism and so comparatively little on dealing with risks that are actually likely to touch our lives. We respond much more strongly to sad or scary anecdotes than we do to raw numbers and probability.

Quick google search says that the smallpox vaccine hadn’t even been invented yet in 1736. I cut and pasted the result at the top of the page when I googled it.

The smallpox vaccine, introduced by Edward Jenner in 1796, was the first successful vaccine to be developed. He observed that milkmaids who previously had caught cowpox did not catch smallpox and showed that inoculated vaccinia protected against inoculated variola virus.

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Josh M. wrote: All issues should absolutely be looked into and an informed decision should be made. Implying that vaccination injury is more dangerous than the disease is completely inaccurate though, empirically. The death rate is considerable higher for covid than the vaccine, we have the data to show that. Some people are more worried about the vaccine because it seems more immediate while covid seems more remote, and I get that, but it doesn't mean the numbers support that fear. I think Ben Franklin actually said it really well when he lost a child to a preventable disease, because he chose not to vaccinate for fear of vaccine injury (which was a much bigger risk back then):

"In 1736 I lost one of my sons, a fine boy of four years old, by the small-pox, taken in the common way. I long regretted bitterly, and still regret that I had not given it to him by inoculation. This I mention for the sake of parents who omit that operation, on the supposition that they should never forgive themselves if a child died under it; my example showing that the regret may be the same either way, and that, therefore, the safer should be chosen."

Humans are absolutely terrible at risk assessment. It's why we spend so much money on counterterrorism and so comparatively little on dealing with risks that are actually likely to touch our lives. We respond much more strongly to sad or scary anecdotes than we do to raw numbers and probability.

Quick google search says that the smallpox vaccine hadn’t even been invented yet in 1736. I cut and pasted the result at the top of the page when I googled it.

The smallpox vaccine, introduced by Edward Jenner in 1796, was the first successful vaccine to be developed. He observed that milkmaids who previously had caught cowpox did not catch smallpox and showed that inoculated vaccinia protected against inoculated variola virus.

Frankiln was referring to variolation, not vaccination.