Michael Ejercito
2024-06-07 12:09:20 UTC
https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSkepticism/comments/1d8n1gr/uk_study_confirms_covid_vaccine_risks_outweigh/
UK study confirms COVID vaccine risks outweigh benefits in children?
RAPHAEL LATASTER, PHD
JUN 05, 2024
red white and black textile
This won’t help parents who gave COVID-19 vaccines to their children
sleep at night. A UK pre-print study (Andrews et al.), involving
researchers from Oxford University, concerning over a million children
(aged 5-15) indicates no mortality benefits to vaccination for children,
coupled with risks like myocarditis. Source. One key finding: “There
were no COVID-19-related deaths in any group.” So, at least for the most
direct and important measure, saving the lives of vaccinees, it appears
that there was no benefit to the children. Another key finding:
“myocarditis and pericarditis were documented only in the vaccinated
groups”. Come again? There were no, I repeat, no cases of myocarditis
and pericarditis in the unvaccinated. All of these occurred in the
vaccinated children, and “More than 51% of adolescents with myocarditis
were admitted to hospital and more than 51% attended emergency care.”
This seems quite a bit different from the claim that such risks were
worse from COVID-19 than from the jab (which never made much sense
anyway since the jab doesn’t stop you from getting COVID, meaning it
isn’t risk vs risk, it’s risk plus risk). Source. And what of the other
possible side effects, like blood clotting and more? Finally, even when
there appeared to be some minor non-mortality benefit, the researchers
noted: “Protection against positive SARS-CoV-2 tests was transient.”
Literally gone within a few months.
The first two points are consistent with my earlier claim that UK
government data, combined with what we now know about the jab’s adverse
effects, makes it look like the risks outweigh the benefits, at least in
the young and healthy, and by a lot. The final point is consistent with
the mounds of evidence that any effectiveness of the vaccines diminishes
to zero incredibly quickly (surely a by-product of the likely massive
exaggerations of effectiveness and safety from the very beginning), and
can even turn negative; and that adverse effects of the vaccines are far
from rare. How much clearer can it get that these products should not
have even been approved, let alone forced on us (with all the additional
problems that entails)? And yet, the powers that be, despite all this
science, still maintain that the benefits outweigh the risks, for all.
Source.
Okay then.
Extra: Please note that even if side effects are ‘rare’, if there’s no
benefit, isn’t it beyond obvious that these products should be avoided,
at least for the young and healthy? And especially if they turn out to
be negatively effective, which is becoming increasingly plausible? And
we can’t even fully determine how ‘rare’ the side effects are yet as we
still do not have access to long-term data. We’ve got a wild couple of
years ahead of us.
UK study confirms COVID vaccine risks outweigh benefits in children?
RAPHAEL LATASTER, PHD
JUN 05, 2024
red white and black textile
This won’t help parents who gave COVID-19 vaccines to their children
sleep at night. A UK pre-print study (Andrews et al.), involving
researchers from Oxford University, concerning over a million children
(aged 5-15) indicates no mortality benefits to vaccination for children,
coupled with risks like myocarditis. Source. One key finding: “There
were no COVID-19-related deaths in any group.” So, at least for the most
direct and important measure, saving the lives of vaccinees, it appears
that there was no benefit to the children. Another key finding:
“myocarditis and pericarditis were documented only in the vaccinated
groups”. Come again? There were no, I repeat, no cases of myocarditis
and pericarditis in the unvaccinated. All of these occurred in the
vaccinated children, and “More than 51% of adolescents with myocarditis
were admitted to hospital and more than 51% attended emergency care.”
This seems quite a bit different from the claim that such risks were
worse from COVID-19 than from the jab (which never made much sense
anyway since the jab doesn’t stop you from getting COVID, meaning it
isn’t risk vs risk, it’s risk plus risk). Source. And what of the other
possible side effects, like blood clotting and more? Finally, even when
there appeared to be some minor non-mortality benefit, the researchers
noted: “Protection against positive SARS-CoV-2 tests was transient.”
Literally gone within a few months.
The first two points are consistent with my earlier claim that UK
government data, combined with what we now know about the jab’s adverse
effects, makes it look like the risks outweigh the benefits, at least in
the young and healthy, and by a lot. The final point is consistent with
the mounds of evidence that any effectiveness of the vaccines diminishes
to zero incredibly quickly (surely a by-product of the likely massive
exaggerations of effectiveness and safety from the very beginning), and
can even turn negative; and that adverse effects of the vaccines are far
from rare. How much clearer can it get that these products should not
have even been approved, let alone forced on us (with all the additional
problems that entails)? And yet, the powers that be, despite all this
science, still maintain that the benefits outweigh the risks, for all.
Source.
Okay then.
Extra: Please note that even if side effects are ‘rare’, if there’s no
benefit, isn’t it beyond obvious that these products should be avoided,
at least for the young and healthy? And especially if they turn out to
be negatively effective, which is becoming increasingly plausible? And
we can’t even fully determine how ‘rare’ the side effects are yet as we
still do not have access to long-term data. We’ve got a wild couple of
years ahead of us.