Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Nailit's Probably Not Around
72 Answers
But here's some reading relating to AstraZeneca and blood clots. Out of 50 MILLION doses in the UK, there have been 73 deaths.
Scientists are finding out why...
https:/
Scientists are finding out why...
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by pastafreak. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I know people who have had bad effects from the vaccine, I was allergic to them... and still have covid. The point is, the answer is different for individuals. The angina attacks that one client is having regularly, could very well lead to a heart attack- but won't be recorded as covid or vaccine related.
Like spice says, I'm not anti-vax, but dislike the refusal to be honest.
Like spice says, I'm not anti-vax, but dislike the refusal to be honest.
// lead to a heart attack- but won't be recorded as covid or vaccine related.//
not related -
this is the other side of the coin of NJ - you see you break your leg, and prove to be covid+ - so they say it is due to covid !
here - you have the heart attack you were gonna have anyway and it is after the vaccine so you say" it IS. it IS. it IS clearly a side effect of the vaccine"
[ the way you tell - is to compare heart attacks say 15 d after vaccines and compare to the reference level two years ago. With very large series - NHS can easily run 1- 5-00,000 look backs -"it shows up in the wash". - this has been done ( multiply). For example the Oxford vaccine was NOT approved in the USA ( I wonder why, when they had three or four of their own) because of side effects - and then they admitted with a very long series that it wasnt as bad as they thought
( this type of recording error is called Recall Bias)
not related -
this is the other side of the coin of NJ - you see you break your leg, and prove to be covid+ - so they say it is due to covid !
here - you have the heart attack you were gonna have anyway and it is after the vaccine so you say" it IS. it IS. it IS clearly a side effect of the vaccine"
[ the way you tell - is to compare heart attacks say 15 d after vaccines and compare to the reference level two years ago. With very large series - NHS can easily run 1- 5-00,000 look backs -"it shows up in the wash". - this has been done ( multiply). For example the Oxford vaccine was NOT approved in the USA ( I wonder why, when they had three or four of their own) because of side effects - and then they admitted with a very long series that it wasnt as bad as they thought
( this type of recording error is called Recall Bias)
bobinsomewherecalledwales @ 15.31:
//despite all those umbrellas we buy the rain keeps falling. As it occurred to you that the measures was put in place because infections are rising and would rise faster without them measures//
Those "umbrellas" don't have any material on them. You're putting your umbrella up, but there's no material, just the ribs! Infections would rise faster withpout those measures? Would they? Really? Stop guessing and speculating, and prove it.
//despite all those umbrellas we buy the rain keeps falling. As it occurred to you that the measures was put in place because infections are rising and would rise faster without them measures//
Those "umbrellas" don't have any material on them. You're putting your umbrella up, but there's no material, just the ribs! Infections would rise faster withpout those measures? Would they? Really? Stop guessing and speculating, and prove it.
//Infections would rise faster withpout those measures? Would they? Really? Stop guessing and speculating, and prove it.//
I see no need to prove it, 10CS. Its so obvious because infection happens when an infected person gets too close to someone and infects them....if everyone tested regular and everyone who was infected kept away from everyone for 2 weeks the virus would die off. Its so obvious. I dont really need 99% of all scientists and doctors to confirm it but they do anyway so any tiny doubt I might of has as gone.
Now can you prove infections wouldnt rise faster without measures like social distancing etc?
I see no need to prove it, 10CS. Its so obvious because infection happens when an infected person gets too close to someone and infects them....if everyone tested regular and everyone who was infected kept away from everyone for 2 weeks the virus would die off. Its so obvious. I dont really need 99% of all scientists and doctors to confirm it but they do anyway so any tiny doubt I might of has as gone.
Now can you prove infections wouldnt rise faster without measures like social distancing etc?
