I deliberately included his age and ethnicity to emphasise how unlikely this is to just happen. When it does occur it’s almost always someone in their early 20s who had an undiagnosed condition or someone of African descent who was genetically predisposed. If he was vaccinated there’s no way it can be covered up.
But he is the first to collapse on the pitch right after getting vaccinated with a vaccine whose main serious adverse effect is cardiac / pulmonary related with a 50x/100x higher serious adverse reaction rate that any general use vaccines that has actually gone through the normal 4 to 6 year clinical trials approval process.
The single biggest cause of death from adverser reaction for people over 70 is cardiac arrest related (according to VAERS) with only a weak correlation it seems to prior history.
These are experimental vaccines which have not gone through the normal clinical safety regime. Thats why tens of thousands are dying from adverse response.
So before you were vaccinated did you sign the legally required clinical trial participant informed consent form? It should be easy to remember as the standard boilerplate form is about one or two pages of dense text which usually has to be signed in several places. Like most legally binding forms of that type which involve health risk and legal liability for the manufacturer.
Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy (aka Athlete’s Heart Syndrome) is far more common than you’d think. The GAA began a scheme to rollout defibrillators to clubs around the country as far back as 2005. They estimate they have resulted in saving the lives of over 40 people so far. I’ve heard at least 3 different people that all suffered cardiac arrest during matches, being interviewed on Irish radio since Saturday .
Still, why let facts get in the way of a good scare
Curious to know where you got the stats on Covid vaccines being related to 50x/100x more serious adverse reactions than any general vaccine in use
The 50x/100x numbers comes from the last 30 years of data from the VAERS database set up by the FDA to track vaccines adverse reactions.
I have been using the Influenza vaccines as the control. Influenza has the same kind of pathogen, pathology and epidemiology. And deaths rates. Except for those under 70. Who have much higher mortality risk from Influenza.
Basically every year there are about 150 million flu shots in the US. With about 30 to 50 adverse reaction deaths reported. A very safe vaccine. So far with under 100 million full vaccinations starting to enter the recording system (the recording lag can be up to 3 to 6 months) there are more than 5000 adverse reaction deaths recorded for the various SARs CoV 2 vaccines in the US. Same recording methodology , same system, as with the influenza vaccines.
What should be also factored in is that one of the most well know problems will all adverse reaction database is an under counting of actual cases. Studies have show the the under-reporting rate could be as high as 90%. So the eventual final vaccination death toll could be in the 40,000 to 50,000 range. Which would make it about the same or greater than the total number of viral pneumonia deaths which were not substitute case deaths. The actual annual death rate did not budge that much because most of the people who died FROM SARs 2 were very likely to die of some respiratory infection / pneumonia anyway. The non substitute case deaths, true excess deaths, is unlikely to be greater than 10% / 15% of all SARS viral pneumonia deaths, when the final numbers are crunched.
But the 50x/100x greater risk still holds. For general population adult mass vaccination.
Yea @jmc called that startling figure weeks, many weeks in advance here, well before it got reported widely on the net when it got more traction afaics, but that stat is will circulated at this point wide and far. I think I posted some graphs form a later source probably on the main coronavirus thread.
We all know the first people to receive the Covid vaccine were the oldest / most vulnerable in society, so just to be clear, you have taken the experience of that group, arbitrarily multiplied it by a factor of 10 and compared this rate with the rate of adverse reactions of other vaccines given to the general population (i.e. a population including the healthies and strongest people in society) to arrive at your conclusion that Covid vaccines are related to 50x/100x more serious adverse reactions
MY read is @jmc is using VAERS is the US. Where the experimental genetic injections have been open to a very wide range of people for a longer time and they started last year. Young and old alike.
Ireland is a skinner box pretending to be a country and serves only as a guide to such.
That’s not true. JMC says the stats are from 3-6 months ago. By start of Feb less than 10% of US population had been vaccinated, by March less than 20%. Young and healthy had not been vaccinated
I’ll let @jmc clarify his own numerous posts if you don’t mind
However digging back to my own contribution on the subject from May, here Jon Rappoport seems to deal with the same assertion as you make aimed @jmc:
“There has been a massive increase in deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) this year. That’s not a ‘conspiracy theory’, that’s an indisputable fact.”
“We’re talking about a huge and unprecedented increase—so massive that in the last 4 months alone, VAERS has received over 40% of all death reports it has ever received in its entire 30+year history.”
“The increase in VAERS death reports is not due to more vaccination.”
“Most recently, the death count went from 2794 on April 5, to 3005 on April 12, to 3848 on April 26….1054 deaths in 21 days.”
“One hypothesis…is that the elderly and infirm, many in long-term care facilities, were the first to be targeted by the COVID-19 vaccine campaign, and they are much more likely to die coincidentally. These coincidental deaths then lead to an increase in suspected vaccine-induced deaths reported to VAERS.”
“VAERS data just does not support that hypothesis. First, because all age groups—not just seniors—had a dramatic increase in VAERS death reports from COVID-19 vaccines…Across the board, all age groups experienced a dramatic increase in deaths reported to VAERS from the COVID-19 shots—even the under 18 group, which has had very few COVID-19 shots (so far).”
Original post from May 11th:
A point made by @jmc some time ago.
We’re not talking about a modest increase in death reports, something we might chat about in concerned voices over Chai tea and bagels at a company mixer. We’re talking about a huge and unprecedented increase —so massive that in the last 4 months alone, VAERS has received over 40% of all death reports it has ever received in its entire 30+year history. So massive it’s literally “off the chart.”
FACT: There has been a massive increase in deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from the COVID-19 vaccines. Why?
Same story covered by Jon Rappoport
Src original post from: Coronavirus 2020
If any or all this data has since proven incorrect, then it’s open to correction.
The first few months of VAERS deaths were around 90% over 70’s. As the lower age cohorts have been added up to 1/3 of all adverse deaths now are under 70’s. Which is about the same kind of age demographics as with the influenza vaccine.
The current vaccination age profile in the US for SARs is little different from the flu shot. The numbers of those who have received the vaccine is about 2/3rds the number of those who get the annual flu shot. There are currently 5000 SARs vaccines deaths recorded versus an annual 30/50 death related to the flu shot.
Thats a 100x difference for you right there. Same data set recording method.
The fact that VAERS under count adverse reactions by up to 90% does not change that relative rsik number. Because it will effect all vaccines data set so the relative risk numbers stay the same. Because of the reasons for under-reporting.
Lots of published literature on this subject.
The same kind of numbers and patterns are see in other countries adverse response database. The SARs vaccines are about two orders of magnitude more dangerous than other general use vaccines.
Thats the data.
I said there was up to 3 to 6 month lag for VAERS. Its follows the usual distribution curve with a 50% reporting rate reached about 4 weeks after time of vaccination. The 80% report rate seems to about week 12. With 90% around week 26. This is pretty standard data input time distribution with theses systems.
So if you look at a VAERS snapshot on a particular and take the full vaccination count from at least 2 to 4 weeks prior you can start working rough numbers. You need to actually do a bit more complex statistical analysis to get more accurate numbers. But if you are looking for trends and just doing relative risk, which is what I have done since December 2020, those estimate techniques give you good ball park numbers. This is pretty basic stuff.
Archived link: https://archive.is/Xsyb5
On day 18, he was admitted to hospital for worsening diarrhea. Since he did not present with any clinical signs of COVID-19, isolation in a specific setting did not occur. Laboratory testing revealed hypochromic anemia and increased creatinine serum levels. Antigen test and PCR for SARS-CoV-2 were negative.
Postmortem molecular mapping by real-time polymerase chain reaction revealed relevant SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold values in all organs examined (oropharynx, olfactory mucosa, trachea, lungs, heart, kidney and cerebrum) except for the liver and olfactory bulb.
Archived link: https://archive.is/CZcKK
Despite your assertions above, the Covid vaccination age profile in the US is very different to the flu vaccine age profile (based on CDC stats).
CDC data base show that over the average flu season, approx 40% of people receiving the flu vaccine were under the age of 40. By March 2021 (allowing for the lag in data, later data not being credible), just 8% of people receiving the flu vaccine were under 40 and they were predominantly those classified as vulnerable. Your Covid data is highly skewed to the experience of older more vulnerable people and that’s a fact, you cannot dispute that. You simply cannot compare the relative experience credibly until you have a full data set and that will be some time yet
Similarly, you are allowing for the lag on VAERS for Covid to “follow the usual distribution curve”. Given how Covid was politicised, do you not think that suggesting any reporting around it follows the same pattern as the flu, is just insane. Do you not thing that maybe there’s a chance it might be a little different?
Data, in time, could well show your estimate to be correct but right now, there is now way to credibly determine that figure. Anyone claiming they can, either does not understand basic statistics or is lying.
Well if you have been reading the VAERS data since January 2021 and following the roll out of vaccines in the big states starting in December 2020 you would have seen the inflection point in the age demographic in VAERS entries data of vaccination when the under 60’s started getting vaccinated in March/April. First four month 90% plus of the moralities were over 70% with a low number of anaphylactic shock deaths. Then when the younger age groups started getting vacation the age distribution quickly started moving towards the expected 1/3 under 60, 2/3’rds over 60. Which reflected the mortality profile of illness that greatly stress the human immune system like influenza and pneumonia.
When I’ve been looking at the data I’ve always made sure to sort by date of vaccination not date of system entry. Because thats the only way you can compare with approximate daily vaccination numbers from other sources.
Yes I do expect the adverse response reporting rate to be much lower for SARs vaccine as against flu vaccines. Thats a given. But the systems are the same for both. And it does not stop one dong comparisons with other vaccines. The much lower reporting rate just means that the most probably adverse response rate confidence interval for the SARs vaccine is going to have a much higher upper bounds than for influenza. Thats all.
Dealing with these kind of partial / unreliable data sets is par for the course with epidemiological and public health statistics. In fact most of the data used for public health decisions is even flakier than the VAERS data. But thats just the way it works.
I suppose it could be worse. It could be the total fantasy world of government econometrics.
According to these screen grabs, it looks like the whole team got injected.
No, the screen grabs do not show “the whole team” got injected.
It shows Vidal got injected while in South America, for the Copa America, with the Chile team
Eriksen is in Denmark for Euro 2020 with the Danish team.
The fact that they play for the same club is irrelevant, unless there is some other information.
Unless Shedding!… well I knew should have stayed away from this one. I didn’t even do Ordinary level Sport in the Leaving ffs.
Anyway does he play for Milan?
If so maybe this is interview with the teams doctor from May 18th, has been the source of the speculation/controversy, that is wrong?
ON PLAYERS - "They deserve great credit. They became experts on the subject, I found myself confronted with them on the pandemic theme and I found them very well prepared. I say more: there is no category in the world, not even us doctors, who have undergone to a screening as accurate as football. It will be good not to disperse this treasure: what has been done can be scientific material to be explored in the future, as well as a model to follow. In the next championship the players will continue to be monitored. But at the start everyone will be vaccinated ".
There is also this:
But maybe it’s all been re-clarified since and this info is out of date and totally wrong?
Maybe it’s this simple