UK Government data re adverse effects of Covid19 vaccines released

[Faraday]

 

"As of 16 June 2021, the MHRA has received 87 Yellow Card reports of myocarditis and pericarditis as suspected side effects after administration of the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine and 4 reports after the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine."

 

https://www.medicinesresources.nhs.uk/mhra-warns-about-myocarditis-and-pericarditis-with-moderna-and-pfizer-covid-19-vaccines-2.html

[Bob20]

50 minutes ago, 9S_ said:

You normally don’t see myocarditis in young people, why? Because it’s a side-effect of heart attacks

And yet these vaccines can cause myocarditis, which is mostly seen in young people.

And worst yet, the mortality rate with myocarditis is 50% (This doctor studying the military says it’s higher up to 66% for the age group in the military)

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459259/

Friend, open the link you provided.

It has NO relation to Covid.

NONE

It's about myocarditis, yes. 

But not related to Covid.

The word Covid isn't anywhere in that paper.

Maybe you posted the wrong link?

 

[9S_]

23 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

It's about myocarditis, yes

Which is a potential side effect of Covid vaccines affecting mostly young people which is not normal

“Depending on the cause and extent of myocardial damage, the mortality rate is… 50% at 5 years.  Despite optimal medical management, overall mortality has not changed in the last 30 years.[12] (Level V)“

[Bob20]

4 minutes ago, 9S_ said:

Which is a potential side effect of Covid vaccines affecting mostly young people which is not normal

“Depending on the cause and extent of myocardial damage, the mortality rate is… 50% at 5 years.  Despite optimal medical management, overall mortality has not changed in the last 30 years.[12] (Level V)“

 

Congrats! Another ignorant person who can't read blocked!

For everyone else, please open the link 9S_ provided:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459259/

It has NOTHING to do with Covid.

And continuing to rant about it without addressing this point is not useful.

[Yinn]

4 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

Congrats! Another ignorant person who can't read blocked!

 

Another one blocked by Bob. 
Bob be talking with himself soon.

Lonely.

[Smithydog]

As a self-confessed data nerd, my eyes lit up when I saw these reports. Considering that the report for the AstraZeneca goes for 124 pages and the Pfizer for 98, I thought I was in Heaven

But once again, like VAERS before it, I caution anyone just using selected numbers as per the following on the site:

This information does not represent an overview of the potential side effects associated with the vaccines. A list of the recognised adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines is provided in the information for healthcare professionals and the recipient information. These can also be found on the Coronavirus Yellow Card reporting site. Conclusions on the safety and risks of the vaccines cannot be made on the data shown in the Profile alone.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions/coronavirus-vaccine-summary-of-yellow-card-reporting

Some stats in summary for you on a combined AstraZeneca and Pfizer basis:

There were a combined 336,349 individual reports "showing" 1,118,534 "adverse effects" out of 86.6 million doses.

Of the "adverse effects" the top 10 alone accounted for 452,170 "adverse effects". The top 10 I saw through the pages were (in order) headaches, raised body temperature/fever, fatigue, chills, nausea, muscle pain, joint stiffness, dizziness and pain in the extremity.

My favourites out of the rest were as follows:

Drooling - 21     Persistent genital arousal disorder - 2      Penile size reduced - 2

Arthropod (spiders etc) bites and stings - 8      Hangover -67      Tooth loss - 8

It was also interesting to see that the numbers included 14,385 investigations and tests (i.e. not actually an adverse effect) and 394 reports of inappropriate schedule of product administration!

But my all time favourite has to be the one line I spotted in the AstraZeneca report - No adverse effect - 6

All I am saying is be careful with the data you use and how you use it as it can give you some unusual information. After all I suspect most of the families of the claimed combined 1564 "adverse effect" of death may not really care so much about our opinions if it was the vaccine or not.

[Bob20]

3 minutes ago, Smithydog said:

As a self-confessed data nerd, my eyes lit up when I saw these reports. Considering that the report for the AstraZeneca goes for 124 pages and the Pfizer for 98, I thought I was in Heaven

But once again, like VAERS before it, I caution anyone just using selected numbers as per the following on the site:

This information does not represent an overview of the potential side effects associated with the vaccines. A list of the recognised adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines is provided in the information for healthcare professionals and the recipient information. These can also be found on the Coronavirus Yellow Card reporting site. Conclusions on the safety and risks of the vaccines cannot be made on the data shown in the Profile alone.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions/coronavirus-vaccine-summary-of-yellow-card-reporting

Some stats in summary for you on a combined AstraZeneca and Pfizer basis:

There were a combined 336,349 individual reports "showing" 1,118,534 "adverse effects" out of 86.6 million doses.

Of the "adverse effects" the top 10 alone accounted for 452,170 "adverse effects". The top 10 I saw through the pages were (in order) headaches, raised body temperature/fever, fatigue, chills, nausea, muscle pain, joint stiffness, dizziness and pain in the extremity.

My favourites out of the rest were as follows:

Drooling - 21     Persistent genital arousal disorder - 2      Penile size reduced - 2

Arthropod (spiders etc) bites and stings - 8      Hangover -67      Tooth loss - 8

It was also interesting to see that the numbers included 14,385 investigations and tests (i.e. not actually an adverse effect) and 394 reports of inappropriate schedule of product administration!

But my all time favourite has to be the one line I spotted in the AstraZeneca report - No adverse effect - 6

All I am saying is be careful with the data you use and how you use it as it can give you some unusual information. After all I suspect most of the families of the claimed combined 1564 "adverse effect" of death may not really care so much about our opinions if it was the vaccine or not.

Thank you. This is what I said hours ago and why I was in favour of quoting the actual source instead of the interpretation by a third party.

[9S_]

27 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

Congrats! Another ignorant person who can't read blocked!

Ad hominem. Usually used by people who have nothing of value to add to a discussion

27 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

It has NOTHING to do with Covid

We’re talking about the vaccines. Especially the side effect of myocarditis, which the CDC admits is a side effect of the MRNA vaccines

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/myocarditis.html

My link is about the 50% mortality rate after years of myocarditis. 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459259/

“the mortality rate is… 50% at 5 years.  Despite optimal medical management, overall mortality has not changed in the last 30 years.[12] (Level V)“

27 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

Congrats! blocked!

yay

Edited September 1, 2021 by 9S_
Context

[BlueSphinx]

33 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

Congrats! Another ignorant person who can't read blocked!

For everyone else, please open the link 9S_ provided:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459259/

It has NOTHING to do with Covid.

And continuing to rant about it without addressing this point is not useful.

Seems that our Ranting Bobbie is the ignorant here. 

Myocarditis is one of the more serious adverse effects that can occur following mRNA covid-19 vaccination.  The unusual high number of myocarditis cases in young healthy Israeli vaccinated males was alarming, and similar occurences have been detected in US (e.g. in the military). 

As usual the CDC 'downplayed' the severity of myocarditis < https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/myocarditis.html > and wrote: Most patients who received care responded well to treatment and rest and quickly felt better.

The prognosis for myocarditis is NOT good, as half of those that contract it, die within five years.

= = = = =

Thailand planning to jab 4 million students with the Pfizer mRNA vaccine in this month of september (before re-opening of schools) will be an excellent case-study for occurence of vaccine-induced myocarditis.  That is if they do proceed with that criminal madness, before coming to their senses.

[Stonker]

6 hours ago, Bob20 said:

You should have printed the actual report

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions/coronavirus-vaccine-summary-of-yellow-card-reporting#annex-1-vaccine-analysis-print

, but instead you publish TapNews interpretation of it.

They call every side effect severe for shock effect, even if they are minor.

I'm not going into it in great detail, as most won't be able to even read and analyse the data in the first place, but you're disseminating fear for no good purpose.

The main points are this:

1) 5.29 billion vaccine doses have been given, yes, some side-effects, but the minority of cases is serious. Compared to the number of sick and death we would have without the vaccines, the numbers of side-effects are tiny.

2) There are more side effects from AZ than from Pfizer. Here we continue with AZ, but in Europe they decided months ago already to stop giving it to under 60-year olds. That's why they cancelled their AZ orders, and ordered Pfizer for boosters for next year. We should learn from this here.

This is the conclusion of the original report:

4. Conclusion

At the time of this report, over 131,511 people across the UK have died within 28 days of a positive test for coronavirus (COVID-19).

Vaccination is the single most effective way to reduce deaths and severe illness from COVID-19. A national immunisation campaign has been underway since early December 2020.

In clinical trials, the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca and COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna have demonstrated very high levels of protection against symptomatic infection. Data is now available on the impact of the vaccination campaign in reducing infections and illness in the UK.

All vaccines and medicines have some side effects. These side effects need to be continuously balanced against the expected benefits in preventing illness.

Following widespread use of these vaccines across the UK, the vast majority of suspected adverse reaction reports so far confirm the safety profile seen in clinical trials. Most reports relate to injection-site reactions (sore arm for example) and generalised symptoms such as a ‘flu-like’ illness, headache, chills, fatigue, nausea, fever, dizziness, weakness, aching muscles, and rapid heartbeat. Generally, these reactions are not associated with more serious illness and likely reflect an expected, normal immune response to the vaccines.

Cases of an extremely rare specific type of blood clot with low blood platelets continue to be investigated and updated advice has been provided.

The expected benefits of the vaccines in preventing COVID-19 and serious complications associated with COVID-19 far outweigh any currently known side effects. As with all vaccines and medicines, the safety of COVID-19 vaccines is continuously monitored and benefits and possible risks remain under review.

We take every report of a suspected ADR seriously and encourage everyone to report through the Yellow Card scheme.

For the rest the report shows nothing that we didn't know already, as they are published regularly.

Interesting how two conclusions based on the  same data can reach such very different conclusions.  As only one of the two has access to the original data, I think I'll tend to believe their conclusions.

[Stonker]

36 minutes ago, BlueSphinx said:

Seems that our Ranting Bobbie is the ignorant here.

No, what he said is absolutely, 100% correct.

What @9S wrote ("If your survive the “cardiac adverse reaction” and end up with myocarditis, the mortality rate increases to 50% after 5 years.") suggests that there's some specific link to Covid and the "cardiac adverse reaction" from a Covid jab, just as does your comment that "The prognosis for myocarditis is NOT good, as half of those that contract it, die within five years."

There's no such link at all, and it's pure smoke and mirrors.  You could just as well have said that "the prognosis for pregnancy is that you're likely to have a baby within nine months" as if there was some link between a Covid jab and pregnancy. It's just classic BS.

 

[Stonker]

53 minutes ago, 9S_ said:

We’re talking about the vaccines. Especially the side effect of myocarditis, which the CDC admits is a side effect of the MRNA vaccines

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/myocarditis.html

My link is about the 50% mortality rate after years of myocarditis. 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459259/

“the mortality rate is… 50% at 5 years.  Despite optimal medical management, overall mortality has not changed in the last 30 years.[12] (Level V)“

 

No, that's not actually true.

The CDC do NOT "admit [myocarditis] is a side effect of the MRNA vaccines."

You're confusing "is" and "can be" as well as confusing "the 50% mortality rate" with "Most patients who received care responded well to treatment and rest and quickly felt better."

The two are very clearly not the same.

[BlueSphinx]

27 minutes ago, Stonker said:

No, what he said is absolutely, 100% correct.

What @9S wrote ("If your survive the “cardiac adverse reaction” and end up with myocarditis, the mortality rate increases to 50% after 5 years.") suggests that there's some specific link to Covid and the "cardiac adverse reaction" from a Covid jab, just as does your comment that "The prognosis for myocarditis is NOT good, as half of those that contract it, die within five years."

There's no such link at all, and it's pure smoke and mirrors.  You could just as well have said that "the prognosis for pregnancy is that you're likely to have a baby within nine months" as if there was some link between a Covid jab and pregnancy. It's just classic BS.

Bob said that myocarditis had nothing to do with covid.   This what he wrote:

 

Friend, open the link you provided.

It has NO relation to Covid.

NONE

It's about myocarditis, yes. 

But not related to Covid.

The word Covid isn't anywhere in that paper.

Maybe you posted the wrong link?

Do a search on Google and you will find dozens of reports linking the increase in myocarditis-cases of young adult males to the mRNA vaccine they were jabbed with. 

 

[BlueSphinx]

24 minutes ago, Stonker said:

No, that's not actually true.

The CDC do NOT "admit [myocarditis] is a side effect of the MRNA vaccines."

You're confusing "is" and "can be" as well as confusing "the 50% mortality rate" with "Most patients who received care responded well to treatment and rest and quickly felt better."

The two are very clearly not the same.

The CDC article was referring to the immediate treatment provided after detection of myocarditis.  9s was referring to the longer term prognosis of having contracted myocarditis. 

[Bob20]

22 minutes ago, Stonker said:

No, that's not actually true.

The CDC do NOT "admit [myocarditis] is a side effect of the MRNA vaccines."

You're confusing "is" and "can be" as well as confusing "the 50% mortality rate" with "Most patients who received care responded well to treatment and rest and quickly felt better."

The two are very clearly not the same.

 

35 minutes ago, Stonker said:

No, what he said is absolutely, 100% correct.

What @9S wrote ("If your survive the “cardiac adverse reaction” and end up with myocarditis, the mortality rate increases to 50% after 5 years.") suggests that there's some specific link to Covid and the "cardiac adverse reaction" from a Covid jab, just as does your comment that "The prognosis for myocarditis is NOT good, as half of those that contract it, die within five years."

There's no such link at all, and it's pure smoke and mirrors.  You could just as well have said that "the prognosis for pregnancy is that you're likely to have a baby within nine months" as if there was some link between a Covid jab and pregnancy. It's just classic BS.

As the post in question is about myocarditis (which by the way is not a side effect of a heart attack as 9S_ claimed, but a viral, bacterial or fungal inflammation of the heart muscle), and the figures in the post are not supported by the weblink given by 9S_ which has no relation with Covid at all, I requested it to be removed.

A post about myocarditis without any shown relation to covid is in my opinion off topic.

And people reading the body text without verifying the link are duped, adding to the unnecessary fear that exists already.

[Stonker]

5 hours ago, BlueSphinx said:

#1 - Considering the fact that most Yellow Card covid-19 adverse effect reports are issued by the medical professional where the person suffering such effects goes for advice/help/treatment, there will be very little Yellow Cards issued for adverse effects that are considered 'normal'.  Why waste time/effort to report adverse effects that are well known side-effects of a jab. 

That's not actually true.

Yes, GP's / "medical professionals", etc are responsible for making Covid-19 Yellow  Card reports, but the idea that they won't "waste time/effort to report adverse effects that are well known side-effects of a jab" because their side effects are "considered 'normal'" isn't just incorrect but it's the opposite of what they're required to do - it's part of their contract allowing them to vaccinate to complete Yellow Cards for every adverse effect reported.

5 hours ago, BlueSphinx said:

#2 - There is also serious UNDER-REPORTING as not everybody suffering adverse effects after the covid-19 jab, or the MD that was consulted for advice/help after such adverse effect, will make the effort to issue a Yellow Card report.  The number of adverse reactions that are actually reported, is estimated to be around ONLY 10% of the adverse effects that take place.  And this is according to the MHRA themselves.

See above (#1).  That's not actually true either.

You're suggesting that "according to the MHRA themselves" at least part of the reason that "ONLY 10% of the adverse effects that take place" are reported is because "the MD that was consulted for advice/help after such adverse effect, [may not] make the effort to issue a Yellow Card report." That's not what "the MRHA themselves" give as the reason, which is that most of those with adverse side effects don't bother reporting them as they're minor.

5 hours ago, BlueSphinx said:

#3 - The proportion of covid-19 adverse effects reports issued is a MULTIFOLD of the adverse effect reports issued for other vaccines.  

How could any rational person expect it to be otherwise, when Covid vaccines are a "MULTIFOLD" of any other vaccines given to adults?

There have been four times as many Covid jabs, for example, as 'flu jabs every year.

5 hours ago, BlueSphinx said:

#4 - The covid-vaccine roll-out started 8 December 2020, so we are currently only looking at a period of max 8.5 month after the very first covid-vaccine was administered.  Knowing that vaccine adverse effects can and do occur YEARS after getting innoculated (sometimes the adverse effects only manifest after 10-20 years) the figures only address the short-term adverse effects.  It would be interesting when the Health authorities would also publish a prognosis of the longer-term adverse effects, especially since the immune system re-programming instructions of the Pfizer/Moderna jabs cannot be 'undone'.

Well, it would be hard to address "the longer-term adverse effects" rather than "the short-term adverse effects" for rather obvious reasons. 

Similarly, it would be equally impossible to address "the longer-term adverse effects" of catching Covid even if asymptomatic in the short term, but studies are now starting to show that it isn't just a case of asymptomatic and it's over, but that the effects can be long lasting both mentally as well as physically so this applies as much for being vaccinated as it does against.

[Stonker]

26 minutes ago, BlueSphinx said:

Bob said that myocarditis had nothing to do with covid.

No, yet again that isn't true.

Some of this could be put down to English not being your first language, but that doesn't seem to be an issue and after a while your continual mis-representing of what's written by other posters and in your links can only be put down to one thing.

As you've quoted him saying, he did NOT say " myocarditis had nothing to do with covid".

What he said was that the link has nothing to do with Covid:

2 hours ago, Bob20 said:

Friend, open the link you provided.

It has NO relation to Covid.

NONE

It's about myocarditis, yes. 

But not related to Covid.

The word Covid isn't anywhere in that paper.

Maybe you posted the wrong link?

That isn't splitting hairs or being pedantic, but what you're saying he said and what he actually said are two very different things.

Once or twice could be put down to being broad brush and acceptable, or a slip or language differences, but constantly saying things that aren't true suggests something very different.

[Stonker]

23 minutes ago, BlueSphinx said:

The CDC article was referring to the immediate treatment provided after detection of myocarditis.  9s was referring to the longer term prognosis of having contracted myocarditis. 

Yes - the two are very different, however that didn't stop you and @9S blurring the differences (and I'm being polite here).

[Stonker]

29 minutes ago, BlueSphinx said:

Do a search on Google and you will find dozens of reports linking the increase in myocarditis-cases of young adult males to the mRNA vaccine they were jabbed with. 

Do a search on Google and you can find "reports" saying pretty well anything you want - that doesn't make them true

[Bob20]

3 minutes ago, Stonker said:

No, yet again that isn't true.

Some of this could be put down to English not being your first language, but that doesn't seem to be an issue and after a while your continual mis-representing of what's written by other posters and in your links can only be put down to one thing.

As you've quoted him saying, he did NOT say " myocarditis had nothing to do with covid".

What he said was that the link has nothing to do with Covid:

That isn't splitting hairs or being pedantic, but what you're saying he said and what he actually said are two very different things.

Once or twice could be put down to being broad brush and acceptable, or a slip or language differences, but constantly saying things that aren't true suggests something very different.

Thanks. I don't usually see their posts anymore

For that matter, English is not my mother tongue either.

The point is that you can't write a few numbers without any backup (as backup is required here) and adding a link to support it, when that link actually has no relation to what you're trying to say is downright deceptive. The link has the same value as a weather report. 

Myocarditis unrelated to Covid is off topic. The numbers in the post come out of thin air. And the link has no relation to anything Covid related.

If disinformation is what they need and facts are considered splitting hairs, then I have a lot of hairsplitting still to do 

[Stonker]

7 hours ago, 9S_ said:

If your survive the “cardiac adverse reaction” and end up with myocarditis, the mortality rate increases to 50% after 5 years. 
 

Source:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459259/

... and the chances of this happening to anyone are, at worst, between 2 and 14 in a million, depending on the vaccine, so between 0.0002 and 0.0014%.

[Stonker]

6 hours ago, Faraday said:

All the more reason to give a third jab. Then a fourth ad infinitum......

Bit like a monkey with a typewriter...

How many 'flu jabs do you need for the jab to give you some protection against 'flu?

Hopefully the Covid vaccines will be more effective and last longer once they're more developed, but I don't see many people turning down 'flu jabs because they're tired of having to have one every year.

[9S_]

1 hour ago, Stonker said:

the 50% mortality rate" with "Most patients who received care responded well to treatment and rest and quickly felt better."

Your misquoting. What happens after 5 years? your mortality rate is going to be 50 to 66%

And do you even know the long term effects of these vaccines? Please share with us the long-term effects/data of these vaccines

 

I’m waiting 

[9S_]

53 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Yes - the two are very different, however that didn't stop you and @9S blurring the differences (and I'm being polite here).

The link is about myocarditis not Covid. 

[9S_]

1 hour ago, Stonker said:

If your survive the “cardiac adverse reaction” and end up with myocarditis, the mortality rate increases to 50% after 5 years.") suggests that there's some specific link to Covid

I never said that, you did. Please don’t misconstrue or add words to a quote to fit your narrative. Next time use the quote function that’s what it’s for. This threat is about vaccines and the cardiac adverse reaction from vaccines not from Covid which you misleadingly included. 

 

2 hours ago, Stonker said:

There's no such link at all, and it's pure smoke and mirrors.  You could just as well have said that "the prognosis for pregnancy is that you're likely to have a baby within nine months" as if there was some link between a Covid jab and pregnancy. It's just classic BS.

I guess those thousands who have myocarditis especially young people can’t reasonably conclude that their experimental vaccine gave them myocarditis. 
 

Surely they’re safe because they have long term studies studying the long term effects of these vaccines. Please share the data and back it up. I’m waiting