Uncommon Sense

December 15, 2020

Important: Before You Line Up for the Pfizer Vaccine . . .

Filed under: Economics,Reason,Technology — Steve Ruis @ 8:25 am
Tags: , ,

I think it is imperative that you read this article. The hand waving going on in the news media, even scientific publications, is of the kind magicians use: to distract you from what the other hand is doing.

An Internal Medicine Doctor and His Peers Read the Pfizer Vaccine Study and See Red Flags [Updated]

17 Comments »

  1. There are more red flags in this paper and related events than present on any May Day in downtown Beijing

    I shall read it, but after this in the opening paragraph of ”And now the paper.” does one really need to?

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by Ark — December 15, 2020 @ 9:14 am | Reply

    • One does if one desires to survive the vaccine … which does not seem to be particularly safe and also seems to have substantial side effects.

      On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 9:14 AM Class Warfare Blog wrote:

      >

      Liked by 2 people

      Comment by Steve Ruis — December 15, 2020 @ 10:11 am | Reply

    • That was my point!

      Like

      Comment by Ark — December 15, 2020 @ 8:04 pm | Reply

  2. From the doctor:

    I reiterate, the paper is silent on this question of exclusion criteria, as is the editorial. Had my mentor seen something like “exclusion criteria” in the source material, and realized that it was not in the final paper

    From the paper:

    We assessed the safety and efficacy of two 30-μg doses of BNT162b2, administered intramuscularly 21 days apart, as compared with placebo. Adults 16 years of age or older who were healthy or had stable chronic medical conditions, including but not limited to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus, or hepatitis C virus infection, were eligible for participation in the trial. Key exclusion criteria included a medical history of Covid-19, treatment with immunosuppressive therapy, or diagnosis with an immunocompromising condition.

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by James Cross — December 15, 2020 @ 9:23 am | Reply

    • “Key exclusion criteria included …” *All *exclusion criteria need to be stated and so indicated that the vaccine has not be “proven” for those populations. No?

      On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 9:24 AM Class Warfare Blog wrote:

      >

      Like

      Comment by Steve Ruis — December 15, 2020 @ 10:13 am | Reply

      • Doctor makes this sound like it is unreported:

        She wrote up her own reactions, and included a very troubling one. About 15 hours after her second injection, she developed a fever of 104.9. She explained that she called her reaction to the Research Nurse promptly the next morning. The recounted the response of the Research Nurse to her information as “A lot of people have reactions after the second injection. Keep monitoring your symptoms and call us if anything changes.”

        Study:

        The most commonly reported systemic events were fatigue and headache (59% and 52%, respectively, after the second dose, among younger vaccine recipients; 51% and 39% among older recipients), although fatigue and headache were also reported by many placebo recipients (23% and 24%, respectively, after the second dose, among younger vaccine recipients; 17% and 14% among older recipients). The frequency of any severe systemic event after the first dose was 0.9% or less. Severe systemic events were reported in less than 2% of vaccine recipients after either dose, except for fatigue (in 3.8%) and headache (in 2.0%) after the second dose.

        Fever (temperature, ≥38°C) was reported after the second dose by 16% of younger vaccine recipients and by 11% of older recipients. Only 0.2% of vaccine recipients and 0.1% of placebo recipients reported fever (temperature, 38.9 to 40°C) after the first dose, as compared with 0.8% and 0.1%, respectively, after the second dose. Two participants each in the vaccine and placebo groups reported temperatures above 40.0°C.

        Liked by 1 person

        Comment by James Cross — December 15, 2020 @ 11:59 am | Reply

        • Ah, mistakes were made. The main point is that such a reaction was very severe and maybe “Keep monitoring your symptoms and call us if anything changes.” was a little understated.

          On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 11:59 AM Class Warfare Blog wrote:

          >

          Liked by 1 person

          Comment by Steve Ruis — December 15, 2020 @ 12:36 pm | Reply

          • I don’t think in general these were all that severe except perhaps for the one high fever. But you have to keep in mind that if you inject over 21,000 people with anything, even a saline solution, you are likely to get somebody showing something that might not even be related to vaccine. Some number of low grade fevers, pain at injection site, are common reactions even with the regular flu vaccine. There were only a couple of people with higher fevers.

            Liked by 2 people

            Comment by James Cross — December 15, 2020 @ 4:16 pm | Reply

      • Did the doctor even read the study?

        Like

        Comment by James Cross — December 15, 2020 @ 12:00 pm | Reply

        • There was a team of 9 or 10 who read the thing and so some miscommunications are definitely possible.

          On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 12:00 PM Class Warfare Blog wrote:

          >

          Liked by 1 person

          Comment by Steve Ruis — December 15, 2020 @ 12:37 pm | Reply

      • The paper clearly isn’t “silent” on exclusion criteria since it states key criteria.

        Liked by 1 person

        Comment by James Cross — December 15, 2020 @ 12:02 pm | Reply

        • I think the point being made was that *all *exclusion criteria are necessary to list for medical providers to know whether their patients are in a group that has been tested for safety.

          On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 12:02 PM Class Warfare Blog wrote:

          >

          Liked by 1 person

          Comment by Steve Ruis — December 15, 2020 @ 12:38 pm | Reply

  3. Most vaccines have some side effects with some people. The newer version of the shingles vaccine has been one of the worst in my experience, especially the second shot.

    You probably know I received the Moderna vaccine in May which also is an mRNA vaccine and had no side effects that I noticed. Originally I was suppose to receive 250 micrograms but I think that dosage got dropped after there were some reactions in the younger age groups with that dosage and they determined that it didn’t produce significantly more antibodies than 100 micrograms. So the age group I was in got either 25 or 100 micrograms and apparently I got 25 which still should be somewhat protective, although nobody knows for sure for how long. The one that will be distributed is 100 micrograms.

    Liked by 2 people

    Comment by James Cross — December 15, 2020 @ 12:10 pm | Reply

    • Because of the quality of coverage on these vaccines, I will be waiting to see how this plays out. I hope it plays out well as the anti-vaxxers will use any mistakes as fodder for their claims. I also, obviously, want a well-tested vaccine when I finally get it.

      On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 12:10 PM Class Warfare Blog wrote:

      >

      Liked by 2 people

      Comment by Steve Ruis — December 15, 2020 @ 12:40 pm | Reply

    • Quite true about vaccine reactions. Many people have reactions which are generally minor. I’ve been fortunate in that I haven’t had any, but my wife felt ill for about 24 hours after getting the pneumonia jab last fall. I got both the pneumonia and flu shot this past year and had no reaction at all except for some soreness in my arm.

      I volunteered for the vaccine study as well but was rejected because they already had enough people in my demographic, but they wanted me to ask anyone I might know who was 70 or over to consider volunteering because they were still short of people in that age range.

      Liked by 2 people

      Comment by grouchyfarmer — December 17, 2020 @ 7:33 am | Reply

  4. As with anything that’s even remotely controversial, there will be pros and cons offered — from all corners. Not too unlike the political world, eh?

    I think we shall soon see, hear, and read about the negative effects as it strikes the especially vulnerable. Does this mean the vaccine is bad/dangerous/to be avoided? I suppose it depends on one’s risk meter. I tend to think most of will take a wait-and-see stance.

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by Nan — December 15, 2020 @ 2:25 pm | Reply

  5. sorry, I’ll take the advice of my physician over that of a writer on economics who writes under a pseudonym, and someone calling themselves “IM DOC” any day.

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by grouchyfarmer — December 15, 2020 @ 10:28 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: