/sci/ - Science & Math

>Epoch Health

>>16206836
>survived the largest medical experiment ever
we was so science and shit

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.05.20.24306810v1

Results Amongst 820,926 previously unvaccinated adolescents, the incidence rate ratio (IRR) for positive SARS-CoV-2 test comparing vaccination with no vaccination was 0.74 (95% CI 0.72-0.75), although the 20-week risks were similar. The IRRs were 0.60 (0.37-0.97) for COVID-19 A&E attendance, 0.58 (0.38-0.89) for COVID-19 hospitalisation, 0.99 (0.93-1.06) for fractures, 0.89 (0.87-0.91) for A&E attendances and 0.88 (0.81-0.95) for unplanned hospitalisation. Amongst 441,858 adolescents who had received first vaccination IRRs comparing second dose with first dose only were 0.67 (0.65-0.69) for positive SARS-CoV-2 test, 1.00 (0.20-4.96) for COVID-19 A&E attendance, 0.60 (0.26-1.37) for COVID-19 hospitalisation, 0.94 (0.84-1.05) for fractures, 0.93 (0.89-0.98) for A&E attendance and 0.99 (0.86-1.13) for unplanned hospitalisation. Amongst 283,422 previously unvaccinated children and 132,462 children who had received a first vaccine dose, COVID-19-related outcomes were too rare to allow IRRs to be estimated precisely. A&E attendance and unplanned hospitalisation were slightly higher after first vaccination (IRRs versus no vaccination 1.05 (1.01-1.10) and 1.10 (0.95-1.26) respectively) but slightly lower after second vaccination (IRRs versus first dose 0.95 (0.86-1.05) and 0.78 (0.56-1.08) respectively). There were no COVID-19-related deaths in any group. Fewer than seven (exact number redacted) COVID-19-related critical care admissions occurred in the adolescent first dose vs unvaccinated cohort. Among both adolescents and children, myocarditis and pericarditis were documented only in the vaccinated groups, with rates of 27 and 10 cases/million after first and second doses respectively.

>>16206836
>survived swine flu
felt like drowning while lying in bed
>survived covid vaccine
got a blood clot and couldn't get my dick up for a year (works fine now)

there's gonna be more shit in the future, that's just how it is.

I know,
regards someone who has already be hospitalized twice after taking only two pfizer shots

>>16206836
Paper gets dropped from peer-review in 3...2...1...
SHUT
IT
DOWN

>>16207090
>>16206946

>>16206836
good news
t. unvax'd

>>16208149
your me

>>16206933
vaxxies will even ignore this even though its from their sacred peer reviewed science journals

>>16206933
>27 and 10 cases/million
well... that doesn't seem so much, no?
I mean, it's a whole lot more than "no case in the unvaccinated group" sure, but it's comparable with the data we already knew of, about rare complications, no?

>>16212043
It's not compatible with "it's completely safe and effective so you have no reason not to get it". People who already acquired immunity through a previous infection were required to take an additional risk by getting the injections despite it having no value to them or society. They were told there was no additional risk, now it turns out that was false.

>>16212043
You deserve to be beaten until no one can recognize your corpse.

>>16206933
Junk data. Populations self-segregate.
Why wasn't RCT performed for relevant demographics before mandating experimental gene therapy?

>>16206836
>preprint
Meaning that the paper hasn't been verified through the peer review process yet.
>>16206933
Not peer-reviewed. The website even says so

>>16207090
You deserved it for bowing down to authority like a cuck.

>>16206836
>How do the vaccinated posters of /sci/ feel about this new science news?

I'm not going to bother with what you posted because it changes nothing: one cannot regret unknowable unknowns.

>>16212111
Fair enough. At least for children, it seems to pretty much confirm that the risks of the vaccine outweigh the risks of the COVID.
But it's not high enough to, for example, explain the number of excess deaths post-COVID, or the apparent epidemics of soccer players suddenly falling dead.
Basically: on one hand you have lots of observers gathering points of data left and right, indicating that the vaccine had a huge negative effects on the population, completely underevaluated by the authorities. While on the other hand, all the data which comes out, while showing the presence of serious side effects with more and more consistency (and showing an ever diminishing measurable positive effect), still stick to a relatively low proportion of injuries at around tens per million.
>>16212745
I'm not vaccinated, you mong. I'm just trying to figure things out before I drop a red-pills to people around me.

>>16212786
Do cucks bow down to authority or do they just watch other people getting fucked? Antivaxxers are the cucks in this scenario.

>>16212779
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGDbpg1nG8Y

>>16206836
So shedding isn't an issue?

>>16218755
This guy has no idea what he's talking about, and at least one of his claims is demonstrably false.

Let's address the first strawman.
>science is peer-reviewed papers
Wrong. Peer-reviewed papers (ideally in a credible journal) are not the entirety of scientific information. The fact that the paper is peer-reviewed just means it passes the bare minimum of scientific standards. It represents only the beginning of determining whether the paper is scientifically sound. Peer-reviewed means it was looked at by people with the relevant expertise, and it "passed."

>If a paper is peer-reviewed, that means everybody thought the same
Wrong. See above.

>An unintended consequence is that when new knowledge comes about, it can never ever be peer-reviewed
This is demonstrably false. For example, some of Einstein's best and currently accepted ideas were published in peer-reviewed journals. See

https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol2-trans/137
https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol2-trans/154
https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol2-trans/186
https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol2-trans/100

>>16219833
What makes a journal credible?

>>16219856

https://libraries.emory.edu/health/writing-and-publishing/quality-indicators/assessing-journal-credibility

https://library.stonybrook.edu/scholarly-communication/know-journal-legitimate/

>>16206836
Why hasnt anyone died yet? Covid killed way more than "le vax". Do you think covid was a deadly pandemic or some shit?

>>16219888
I think I did it on my own I'm maybe performing now.

Again I am injured. Although I am intelligent, it's like a power box called using my mind(instead of me), seemingly. I can't think through and thus know what I have acquired, and especially say it, these vibrations are not there. I can't move my body in sync. I can barely sense messages. These ones are clearer than usual. Plus I can think about what's going on, as obvious by this versing. However. If I use my mind like the power, it doesn't fail, and I know how I should stand. Even with real wording.

>>16212111
>It's not compatible with "it's completely safe and effective so you have no reason not to get it"
Pretty sure it's safer than driving a car, stop being a dishonest histrionic nigger.

>>16218771
Pretty much no one alleges that shedding can cause your cells to pump out spike proteins, which is the real problem with the injected substance. It's possible for you to get some spike proteins from someone else through shedding but we're talking about many orders of magnitude less than what a body produces when given the injection. And there's no alteration of your cells, just some annoying, poorly shaped spike proteins for your immune system to clear out, which it can easily do in that quantity.

>>16219900
>Pretty sure
Is that the standard of science now? Also I've never heard of a government mandate for companies to fire people from their jobs for choosing not to drive.

>>16221071
Djoker still loling his lmao off over that one for sure

>>16206836
I wish I hadn't been such a wimpy pushover, I wish I had never got it. Hopefully I was in the placebo group and will survive out of sheer luck, thats my best chance.

>>16223678
Nac. Protease enzymes. Anti inflammatory diet (so low carb). Aged garlic extract. Fasting.

>>16219900
the n word is racist

>>16222275
He has won nearly a dozen more major championships since foregoing the vax, seems not to have negatively impacted his health in any way.

>>16226121
especially not with so many of his competitors dead or injured by the vax

>preprint
fuck ALL the way off and stay fucked off

>>16227907
how many boosters are you on?

>>16206836
most vaxxxies are too image conscious to ever admit a mistake, but if you're in the UK you can sue the vax producers and get $20 million free gibes money if you want it

The vaccine prevented the worst cases of Covid from killing you and was certainly far less dangerous. You people have nothing but misinformation.

Fucking retards

>>16230607
no they didn't

>>16230607
>The vaccine prevented the worst cases of Covid from killing you
No it didn't - refer to pic

>and was certainly far less dangerous
No it wasn't - refer to pic

https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa2110345/suppl_file/nejmoa2110345_appendix.pdf

>>16232686

You need to read the rest of the paper and check the rest of that table and others.

>Of 31 cases of severe, FDA-defined COVID-19, 12 with onset post-dose 1, 30 occrnTed in placebo recipients, corresponding to 96.7% VE (95% CI 80.3-99.9) against severe COVID-19

>(Fig. 2,

>Table 86).

This isn't a matter of opinion. You are objectively wrong.

>>16232745
Shills continuing to confidently claim others are wrong

1. I specifically referred to covid deaths, not severe cases. The trials showed no statistical difference in covid deaths.

2. The trials showed 29 cases of severe covid were prevented in the vaccine arm. That's great and all but to achieve that, 23,040 people needed to be injected with a new drug.

3. "severe, FDA-defined COVID-19" can just be a positive PCR test and an increased heart rate. Severe does not mean death or even long term complications.

4. There were 112 more severe adverse events in the vaccine arm.

You're hallucinating again chatGPT

>>16219833
The only thing peer-review does is slightly change your article in such a way that it satisfies ~3 people by adding citations to their papers and possibly by explaining a concept or two more thoroughly, most likely in the supplement. If you get through the editor, it's unlikely that your peers stop you either.

>>16232858
>when your paper diffraction in graded index refractors gets rejected because the four paragraph diversity equity and inclusion subsection of the climate change statement failed to kowtow to furries obsequiously enough

>>16232821
Awwww, how does it feel being completely wrong?

https://www.npr.org/2023/07/25/1189939229/covid-deaths-democrats-republicans-gap-study

let me repeat, you have nothing but misinformation

>>16206836
I don't really care. I got 2 doses of Pfizer, 2 and a half years ago. I've also had covid itself a total of probably 5 times now (some cases before and some after getting vaccinated). I've had multiple physicals since then and my heart is fine, same as it was before - I smoke half a pack of cigarettes a day at the minimum and have for about 6 years.
I also did a gram of cocaine and smoked two whole packs with my buddy the day after I got my second shot, but I'm not sure if that's relevant

>>16234125
>I got 2 doses of Pfizer, 2 and a half years ago. I've also had covid itself a total of probably 5 times now

>>16206836
I got 3 Pfizers and 1 COVID-Delta a few years back, just upgraded to N100 respirators and said fuck vaccines since then, because respirators actually work.

I think my exercise tolerance was a little fucked when I got the Pfizers, but I ain't have no heart attack. Run 10km a couple times a week now and I have no issues.

so like... sucks if you got heart problems? me personally, w/e man, I'm healthy 'nuff still

>>16234077
>I come to /sci/ to shill government propaganda

>>16206853
problem?

>>16235895
It's bibblin babbling bob and his term 'schizobabble'

>>16234077
>npr.org
sup shareblue

>>16235117
myocarditis take about 5 years to kill you on average

>>16235898
Epoch times is a far-right conspiracy-promoting anti-medicine anti-science anti-vaccine mouthpiece of the Falun Gong.

>>16238241
>noooooooo, religious groups can't own newspapers!!!
>I only believe in government propaganda!!!
>the government would never lie!!!

>>16238140
>vaxxers will be dead in 2 weeks!
>vaxxers will be dead in 6 months!
>vaxxers will be dead in 2 years!
>vaxxers will be dead in 5 years!

>>16238140
>>16239190
shouldn't I have some impaired-ass VO2 max or oxygen saturation if I'm nearly dead of myocarditis? at least some elevated C-reactive protein or some shit? why have all my blood values just gotten slightly better from working out more?

>maybe my DNA matches the filter designed by the reptilians

>>16239190
cope

>>16239067

>>16212779
>muh peer review
Midwit