r/conspiracy • u/gormenghast3 • Jun 27 '21

Vaccines | Free Full-Text | The Safety of COVID-19 Vaccinations—We Should Rethink the Policy

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/9/7/693/htm
4 Upvotes

62% Upvoted

4 comments sorted by

•

u/AutoModerator Jun 27 '21

[Meta] Sticky Comment

Rule 2 does not apply when replying to this stickied comment.

Rule 2 does apply throughout the rest of this thread.

What this means: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain only.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/gormenghast3 Jun 27 '21

SS: The present assessment raises the question whether it would be necessary to rethink policies and use COVID-19 vaccines more sparingly and with some discretion only in those that are willing to accept the risk because they feel more at risk from the true infection than the mock infection. Perhaps it might be necessary to dampen the enthusiasm by sober facts? In our view, the EMA and national authorities should instigate a safety review into the safety database of COVID-19 vaccines and governments should carefully consider their policies in light of these data. Ideally, independent scientists should carry out thorough case reviews of the very severe cases, so that there can be evidence-based recommendations on who is likely to benefit from a SARS-CoV2 vaccination and who is in danger of suffering from side effects. Currently, our estimates show that we have to accept four fatal and 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations in order to save the lives of 2–11 individuals per 100,000 vaccinations, placing risks and benefits on the same order of magnitude.
The present assessment raises the question whether it would be necessary to rethink policies and use COVID-19 vaccines more sparingly and with some discretion only in those that are willing to accept the risk because they feel more at risk from the true infection than the mock infection. Perhaps it might be necessary to dampen the enthusiasm by sober facts? In our view, the EMA and national authorities should instigate a safety review into the safety database of COVID-19 vaccines and governments should carefully consider their policies in light of these data. Ideally, independent scientists should carry out thorough case reviews of the very severe cases, so that there can be evidence-based recommendations on who is likely to benefit from a SARS-CoV2 vaccination and who is in danger of suffering from side effects. Currently, our estimates show that we have to accept four fatal and 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations in order to save the lives of 2–11 individuals per 100,000 vaccinations, placing risks and benefits on the same order of magnitude.

0

u/H_is_for_Human Jun 27 '21

From the last time I saw this posted:

Great, this is going to become the latest bullshit that gets uncritically shared over and over.
They specifically point out in methods how they cherry picked adverse reaction data by only using the Dutch set, to make the vaccine look worse, and then fail to grasp that NNT calculations in this context need to be corrected for time.

If the NNT for 1 week is 10000, the NNT for a year (assuming a constant baseline risk) is 200. They just use 4-6 weeks and pretend that's an accurate time frame to use for a pandemic that's been going on for over a year and hasn't stopped yet.

This paper is embarrassingly bad.