Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » So far in the USA 966 people have died after getting a COVID 19 injection. Pfizer or Moderna. We're told there is NO causal connection?

So far in the USA 966 people have died after getting a COVID 19 injection. Pfizer or Moderna. We're told there is NO causal connection?

How do "they" KNOW that? We're supposed to believe them because they said so?

Posted - March 11, 2021

Responses


  • 10570
    How do they NOT know that?  People die all the time. 

    Prison X got an injection, then was killed by a drunk driver on the way home.    Could there be a connection?  Perhaps the vaccine has a side affect of attracting drunk drivers.  

    Person Y has major clogged arteries from eating 12 boxes of Twinkies each day for the past 30 years.  That person gets and injection,  but then dies from a massive heart attack a few hours later.  Connection?  Maybe.  Maybe not.

    Saying "996 people after receiving an injection" makes a good scare tactic for antivaxers (we told you so).  True or not.

    Of course, odds are that some people will die from the vaccine.  But if 300 million won't die by taking the vaccine, does that mean no one should get the vaccine?  Just in case they might become #967?
      March 11, 2021 2:40 PM MST
    2

  • 113301
    Thank you for your reply Shuhak. Of course one can interpret anything in any way at any time including pooh poohing it. It's a free country. Believe or disbelieve is all on you. Dealer's choice. Pick a number any number. Which shell is the pea under?
      March 12, 2021 2:16 AM MST
    1

  • 13395
    Hundreds of thousands of people have died before getting the vaccine so is there a greater point in not getting it at all?
      March 11, 2021 3:50 PM MST
    2

  • 113301
    I don't know Kg. What puzzles me is this. More than one person got the Pfizer first injection and went back for the second and died shortly thereafter. To say it was pure coincidence and not caused by is an unknown don't you think? What is in the second shot that wasn't in the first? If it were an allergy to an ingredient why didn't the first one cause problems? I'll ask. It's a reasonable question in my opinion. Thank you for your reply. here goes.
      March 12, 2021 2:19 AM MST
    1

  • 3719
    A bald statistic - X happened and then Y - does not tell us anything about a link between X and Y. The most it  does is raise a question to be investigated.

    For it is only correlation (coincidence, if you like). We would need to know what actually happened before and after X, before being able to suggest X might have caused Y. Then if X proves a hazard with possible outcome Y, to establish the risk. (Hazard and risk are not synonyms.)  

    What did each of those 996 people actually die from? Were they already ill, from perhaps a heart disease, cancer or something? Did they have any known allergies, or had they suffered odd complaints that may have been unidentified allergies? If so could these allergies have been potentially fatal ones?

    Nearly 1000 is a lot of people, and all unexpected deaths are tragedies; but 1000 among how many who had the same vaccines with no ill effects, or at most only minor ones that soon faded?

    Those are questions the medical authorities will be asking, but they will no doubt be asking many more questions, talking to colleagues around the country and abroad, sifting mere coincidences from possible links, before they can investigate the latter fully. 

    You can't just turn blind number correlations into automatic causes and results - life, and medicine, don't work like that.  


      March 14, 2021 6:51 PM MDT
    0