> But anyway, in my dataset of about 1,000 acquaintances, the only one under 50 hospitalized related to Covid was a friend who was a 38 year mother of 2, in top shape, who had a heart attack within a month after her second dose, and to this day is still recovering.
There's a reason we don't use anecdotes as a substitute for medical research. Not least because they're subject to the post hoc fallacy. Just because one event follows another doesn't mean there's a causal relationship.
There's every chance that mother of 2 was going to have a heart attack anyways. It happens. The fact they had a vaccine first likely isn't relevant, clinically speaking. If you give a few billion people vaccines, you will find literally every effect that follows. Car crashes. Broken arms. Death by mauling. Syphilis. Turbo-cancer of the elbow.
In that age group, a boundary group, your risk of having a heart attack are somewhere between 17 and 97 per 100,000. [1] The risk of a heart issue from the vaccine is about two orders of magnitude lower than that.
> I do not think these vaccines are that dangerous—I would say they probably cause as much harm as one night of heavy binge drinking— ...
You have no basis to arrive at that conclusion.
> ... but I saw zero evidence of any benefit ...
It's in the data.
> ... and yes I saw one very bad case of severe life threatening side effect.
You saw one anecdotal report of a bad thing that happened to someone after they took a COVID vaccine, without any evidence they were connected. I'm sure more than once someone took a tylenol and got hit by a bus. That doesn't mean taking tylenol causes getting hit by a bus.
> The proportions of participants who reported at least 1 serious adverse event were 0.6% in the vaccine group and 0.5% in the placebo group. [2]
> If you give a few billion people vaccines, you will find literally every effect that follows. Car crashes. Broken arms. Death by mauling. Syphilis. Turbo-cancer of the elbow.
There's a reason we don't use anecdotes as a substitute for medical research. Not least because they're subject to the post hoc fallacy. Just because one event follows another doesn't mean there's a causal relationship.
There's every chance that mother of 2 was going to have a heart attack anyways. It happens. The fact they had a vaccine first likely isn't relevant, clinically speaking. If you give a few billion people vaccines, you will find literally every effect that follows. Car crashes. Broken arms. Death by mauling. Syphilis. Turbo-cancer of the elbow.
In that age group, a boundary group, your risk of having a heart attack are somewhere between 17 and 97 per 100,000. [1] The risk of a heart issue from the vaccine is about two orders of magnitude lower than that.
> I do not think these vaccines are that dangerous—I would say they probably cause as much harm as one night of heavy binge drinking— ...
You have no basis to arrive at that conclusion.
> ... but I saw zero evidence of any benefit ...
It's in the data.
> ... and yes I saw one very bad case of severe life threatening side effect.
You saw one anecdotal report of a bad thing that happened to someone after they took a COVID vaccine, without any evidence they were connected. I'm sure more than once someone took a tylenol and got hit by a bus. That doesn't mean taking tylenol causes getting hit by a bus.
> The proportions of participants who reported at least 1 serious adverse event were 0.6% in the vaccine group and 0.5% in the placebo group. [2]
[1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32111640/
[2] https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer...