EyelessMC
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2020
Fantastic! Was annoyed something like this was kept behind a paywall but now we have even more available for research. When I update the OP tomorrow I'll add this as well.
Edit: Immediately I can see why this study was considered so important:
So already we have a field that's barely researched--reporting on AEs (adverse events) from vaccines. Not that AEs aren't reported (they are) but that there seems to be evidence of reporting bias, as I'd call it. The more severe an AE, the more likely it will be reported, leading to higher reporting sensitivity. On the face of it this makes sense since physicians, pharmacologists, etc. would be more compelled to report about life-threatening issues rather than something like a rash. However, the point of VAERS isn't to just catalogue reports of life-threatening AEs but all AEs. Reporting adverse events is even part of the responsibility of Vaccine Safety Coordinators in each state.
I'm not done reading and just adding my 2 cents: What if the bias wasn't just about the particular type of AE but was also about the type of vaccine? What if, as Kirsch speculated and as the VAERS whistleblower (see OP) suggested, physicians and clinicians were reticent to ever consider an adverse effect as an adverse effect because they were convinced the vaccine in question caused no adverse effect?
If you think something is perfectly, universally safe and won't cause AEs then why would you ever connect the symptom a vaccinated patient experiences to the vaccination?
Obviously this is completely anti-science but it's happened before: A documentary called "Generation RX" highlighted how there was a boom of antidepressant prescriptions in the early 90's, among other things. Many psychologists/therapists/whatever were over prescribing these medicines to patients they deemed depressive or otherwise, leading to chemical imbalances in their brains and major--even fatal--consequences. There's a lot to be said about that, Big Pharma and the FDA's role in how things played out but suffice to say that it happens: Despite whatever a doctor sees before their very eyes, if they are convinced for whatever reason that what they are administering cannot be causing trouble then they will not consider the possibility. Doctors are people, after all.
So even without instances where physicians are being told not to report AEs, we still have the potential of bias in favor of not reporting them simply because said physicians are convinced they aren't AEs to begin with, and this possibility has existed long before the Covid vax. How much more when the concern of causing people to be "vaccine hesitant" is on a doctor's mind while the CDC's facile reassurances ring out in their ears?
If you think something is perfectly, universally safe and won't cause AEs then why would you ever connect the symptom a vaccinated patient experiences to the vaccination?
Obviously this is completely anti-science but it's happened before: A documentary called "Generation RX" highlighted how there was a boom of antidepressant prescriptions in the early 90's, among other things. Many psychologists/therapists/whatever were over prescribing these medicines to patients they deemed depressive or otherwise, leading to chemical imbalances in their brains and major--even fatal--consequences. There's a lot to be said about that, Big Pharma and the FDA's role in how things played out but suffice to say that it happens: Despite whatever a doctor sees before their very eyes, if they are convinced for whatever reason that what they are administering cannot be causing trouble then they will not consider the possibility. Doctors are people, after all.
So even without instances where physicians are being told not to report AEs, we still have the potential of bias in favor of not reporting them simply because said physicians are convinced they aren't AEs to begin with, and this possibility has existed long before the Covid vax. How much more when the concern of causing people to be "vaccine hesitant" is on a doctor's mind while the CDC's facile reassurances ring out in their ears?
Not everything is some kinda conspiracy theory. Although it's true that the "Infodemic" push aims to censor contrary information at all costs across the world, and it's true that individuals are bias in favor of/against the Covid vaccines, sometimes things are painfully simple too--like doctors being so overworked they can't report all the adverse events they witness, or doctors simply being disinclined to consider AEs at all, let alone report them.
Last edited:
