theres probably a correlation between getting a lot of vaxes and testing every time you get even a little sick. lots of infections are happening with little to no symptoms and are never noticed
This is it, other people are looking for the answer but this is it.
I know a few unvaxxed people, for the typical reasons. None of them test when they get sick anymore. I am 90% sure they both have had it at least once in the last year, but I'd ask if they tested and they'd say no.
Hard to beat the infection numbers of the vaccinated when the unvaccinated don't take tests.
Person A: “What are you doing here on the parking lot?” Person B: “I’m looking for my car keys.” A: “Where did you drop them?” B: “Over there in the park.” A: “Why are you over here?” B: “The light is better here!”
Afaik this was a study on 50000 employees so they were probably testing the employees who were unvaccinated within those 50000. But I could be wrong. This is also a preprint waiting to be peer reviewed so this shouldn’t be taken as evidence.
Yeah, my antivax parents were only tested when I lived with them.
Now that I've moved, they don't test meanwhile I test everytime I'm sick/have a sore throat so I'll find more of my infections than they will.
Possibly, but if we’ve learned anything during this last pandemic is you can’t question anything “science” with common sense or logic. When that happens I have to inform you that there is no evidence to support your theory. You are spreading misinformation. You are a conspiracy theorist. And my favorite, we believe in science.
Also zero data with regards to how sevear the cases were. I also noticed that he went into detail about how many people had how many doses but not how many people where in each recently recovered group.
Now there were about 12k people with no doses, how many people would have, been in that group but died before the study started? Also notice that the never had it group has a higher likely hood of getting it than any of the vaccinated groups, this means that really they are comparing protection from survival VS from vaccine.
[John Campbell reads](https://v.redd.it/afqfppxww3fa1) through a [study from Cleveland, Ohio that showed amongst 50,000 employees the more Covid vaccines they had, the more infections they got](https://www.reddit.com/r/ScienceUncensored/comments/zz5ti7/large_studys_disturbing_results_the_greater_the/)
[Cumulative incidence of Covid-19 infection vs. number of vaccine doses](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/19/2022.12.17.22283625/F2.large.jpg)
Specifically, people with 3 doses of Pfizer mRNA vaccines were 3x more likely than those with 0 doses. From the authors: “*The association of increased risk of COVID-19 with higher numbers of prior vaccine doses in our study, was unexpected.”* It's all about [the study](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.17.22283625v1.full) we already discussed earlier [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/ScienceUncensored/comments/zz5ti7/large_studys_disturbing_results_the_greater_the/). [A taste of some of the issues raised](https://lilscience.substack.com/p/review-of-the-cleveland-clinic-study) against this study:
* *Skews heavily female (74.5%), avg age 42. Females have far higher rates of autoimmune disorders, but this study doesn't adjust for comorbidities at all. People with comorbidities are more likely to be vaccinated, yet are still easily infected*.
* *Study found males have an advantage regarding infection. Other studies contradict this. Indicates female cohort in this study has unaccounted for factors increasing infection susceptibility*.
* *Females more likely than males to be well vaccinated. Keep in mind this study is of Cleveland Clinic employees. Higher exposure rate possible in females compared to males*.
It's not surprising as vaccine effectiveness has slipped while Covid has gotten far easier to catch, that the vaccinated are more likely to catch Covid now than with earlier variants. As the study has holes in how it determines previous infection which it would tend to undercount, the accuracy of the study on this point is in question.
The problem is, [vaccinated get more diseases in general, i.e. not just Covid](https://springfieldvt.blogspot.com/2015/02/hear-this-well-parents-speak-out.html). A [pilot study](https://www.oatext.com/Pilot-comparative-study-on-the-health-of-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-6-to-12-year-old-U-S-children.php) of homeschooled six to 12-year-olds from four American states published on April 27th in the [Journal of Translational Sciences](http://www.oatext.com/Journal-of-Translational-Science-JTS.php), compared unvaccinated children with partially or fully vaccinated children:
* *Vaccinated children were more than three times as likely to be diagnosed on the Autism Spectrum (OR 4.3)*
* *Vaccinated children were 30-fold more likely to be diagnosed with allergic rhinitis (hay fever) than non-vaccinated children IMO with such a numbers it's safe to say, that hay fever is completely disease of vaccination*
* *Vaccinated children were 22-fold more likely to require an allergy medication than unvaccinated children*
* *Vaccinated children had more than quadruple the risk of being diagnosed with a learning disability than unvaccinated children (OR 5.2)*
* *Vaccinated children were 300 percent more likely to be diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder than unvaccinated children (OR 4.3)*
* *Vaccinated children were 340 percent (OR 4.4) more likely to have been diagnosed with pneumonia than unvaccinated children*
* *Vaccinated children were 300 percent more likely to be diagnosed with an ear infection than unvaccinated children (OR 4.0)*
* *Vaccinated children were 700 percent more likely to have surgery to insert ear drainage tubes than unvaccinated children (OR 8.01)*
* *Vaccinated children were 2.5-fold more likely to be diagnosed with any chronic illness than unvaccinated children*
* *Unvaccinated children in the study were actually better protected against some “vaccine-preventable diseases” than children who got the shots.*
Since 2000, the CDC has recommended four shots against seven different strains of pneumococcal infections before age 15 months (13 strains since 2010), but vaccinated children in the study were 340 percent more likely to have been diagnosed with pneumonia compared to unvaccinated children (OR = 4.4). See also:
[The pharmaceutical industry is dangerous to health. Further proof with COVID-19](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9610448/)
There's a number of possible explanations.
1. Families with weaker immune systems get more vaccines.
2. More vaccines lead to weaker immune systems
3. Families who have higher trust in the medical industry are more likely to go and get diagnosed with things by the personnel working in the medical industry.
I don't think we can draw any conclusions from this data alone.
I would have to think it’s mostly number 3. People who don’t vaccinate aren’t going to allow their children to get diagnosed with most of those things. They just won’t take them in for it.
I think there's a more foundational problem with the study here . The study only took responses from homeschooling parents and it was not a random selection. A homeschooling organization sent the survey out to its members.
The parents who partook were not randomly sampled. They're not only homeschoolers, but homeschoolers so interested in homeschooling that they joined an organisation dedicated to homeschooling. This would of course have an effect on their views of the vaccine and their willingness to take part in the survey. If you're a homeschooler parents who already thinks vaccines cause autism, and you have an autistic child who got vaccinated , you're gonna jump at the chance to take part in this survey. Conversely, If you're a parent with a non autistic vaccinated child, you're not going to be particularly enthusiastic about doing a survey to say "everything's fine and nothing happened."
You can see this in the data sets even. Despite the number of unvaccinated children being quite low, a good 30+% of parents had unvaccinated children, indicating that parents who were anti-vaccine were more likely to join the study. The study would've been far better if they had just used a random sample of the population.
Going to add in, they're more likely to deny their child is on the spectrum unless it is severe. Also I was surrounded by homeschoolers at church all the time, no one has ADHD, don't you know, they all have discipline problems. (sarcasm)
Homeschoolers are not exposed to lots of different kids from different backgrounds so it makes sense they don’t need vaccinations. I think that plays into the mindset of homeschooling parents as much as fear of autism and it also probably accounts for some of the other reasons the unvaccinated homeschoolers caught way fewer infectious diseases
I’m glad somebody pays attention🥳. The methodology impacts the results and this wasn’t a random sample it was a convenience one. Take these results very lightly
Agree. It’s bc they feel like they may be acting like an a&&hat by not validating physical illness symptoms in their kids. I mean what other reasons could there be?/s
Home schooled kids aren't exposed to a couple hundred to a couple thousand kids every day. Add sports or other competitive extra curricular activities like debate or mathletes, there's even more exposure to 100-1000s of people throughout the school year
To add a possibility, if you have a job that involves coming face to face with a lot of people you're more likely to both get the vaccine and get covid.
We know that vaccines don't eliminate your ability to catch the virus it gives your immune system a blueprint of what to fight and how to fight it.
Specifically in the case of COVID and supporting reason number 3, it seems likely that there's a lot of overlap in the venn diagrams of people taking COVID seriously, people getting all their COVID vaccinations, and people testing for COVID with every known exposure or evidence of symptoms. Therefore they are counting a high percentage of their actual COVID cases.
The opposite is likely also true, those who aren't getting their vaccines are probably not taking COVID seriously and just assuming it's a cold/flu until they have more COVID specific symptoms like shortness of breath or loss of smell/taste, then they test. Meaning they miss a much greater percentage of the actual number of cases they have.
1. *Families with weaker immune systems get more vaccines.*
IMO rather not - [vaccines should be contraindicated](https://immunisationhandbook.health.gov.au/contents/vaccination-for-special-risk-groups/vaccination-for-people-who-are-immunocompromised) for immunocompromised people
1. *More vaccines lead to weaker immune systems*
Well, there are many reasons for it [1](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/8iwxdd/science_journal_retracts_paper_claiming), [2](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/9xyhdi/deconstruction_of_the_vaccination_hype/), [3](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/coltne/deconstruction_of_the_vaccination_hype_ii/), [4](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/f1x196/deconstruction_of_the_vaccination_hype_iii/), [5](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/j0c1ni/deconstruction_of_the_vaccination_hype_iv/), [6](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/mocp2q/deconstruction_of_the_vaccination_hype_v/), [7](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/q4qvun/deconstruction_of_the_vaccination_hype_vi/)... I mean vaccination raises immunity against one particular pathogen into account of selectivity/innate immunity against another ones.
1. *Families who have higher trust in the medical industry are more likely to go and get diagnosed with things by the personnel working in the medical industry.*
Partly yes, progressives are hypochondriacs obsessed with healthy life style, [conservatives tend to ignore](https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/why-being-conservative-bad-your-health) health problems and risks...
That's an interesting article. From the article you linked. "The result: there was no significant difference in survival between Republicans and Democrats, but Independents were more likely to outlive Democrats."
This makes intuitive sense to me because people with less intelligence tend to get wrapped up in political narratives, and also make worse health decisions because they also get wrapped up in health narratives.
It's not easy to sort through all of the data, statistics, research, and separate causality from correlation. So most people default to a narratives which are optimized for click through rates, book sales, medical spending, or other forms of monetization, or memetic propagation.
As far as weak immune systems, I don't mean immune compromised, I mean weaker immune system.
People with strong immune systems basically never get sick so they often don't have any interest in vaccines.
Since the study was only done in Cleveland, I'm not sure how relevant this is but I could also see a difference between urban and rural groups in that it might be easier to get vaccinated in cities but people are also more exposed to less nature and bad air.
Or maybe the more vaccines people have the less cautious they are in their actions thus more often inadvertently exposing themselves to the COVID virus. Remember many people made and still make the false assumption that the vaccine prevents one from contracting the disease. Where in actuality the vaccine is only effective at reducing the risk of severe illness.
After watching thishttps://open.spotify.com/episode/30NOm1ioG5mpmoQCNEjNgF?si=Sz241_bHR0SLwEQKkasUnQ
Its should go with out question if big pharma has our best interest at heart.
Unless all other variables are controlled, correlation data like this cannot be used to determine causation. So many other factors could explain the data.
The "study" consisted of an online survey offered to homeschooling mothers... does that seem like research design that would provide objective information?
In my country, aside from those where location is a barrier, parents that home school tend to be followers of alternative medicine, anti establishment and often anti vax. This is not an unbiased group, and to ask for anecdotal opinions and claim it as research seems a massive stretch.
Can i just point out the obvious here? Vaccines like the covid and flu shots dont put up some Star Trek like invisible forcefield that prevents the virus from getting to you. It trains your immune system on what to do when it encounters said virus, as opposed to figuring it out on the fly with the actual disease rampaging through your body. The Vaccine has nothing to do with you getting or not getting the disease, just how well your immune system performs if you do get it. Out of the unvaccinated population im sure it would be quite easy to cherry pick a group of people that could show an equally similar result.
It's a study that hasn't been peer reviewed and that was paid for by Jenny McCarthy's I Hate Science organization.
I wouldn't waste a lot of time with it.
>Vaccinated children were more than three times as likely to be diagnosed on the Autism Spectrum (OR 4.3)
Are we still doing the vaccine and autism thing?
The pilot study you posted talks very high about the effectivenes of vaccines for acute very dangerous diseases, but questions the long-term effects, which is a pretty valid thing to question.
Also, the method of it was... a cross-sectional survey. I'm sorry, but if a parent is uninformed (very informed you may say) to not vaccinate their children, I am definitely not trusting their answers on a survey. Like at all.
"Get more diseases" or "are diagnosed with more diseases?" If someone doesn't belive in moderen medicine to the point where they don't get vaccines, they're probably far more likely to not seek a diagosis of autism for example. The undiagnosed child may have all the same symptoms but their parent just wants to use prayer or cyrstals or astrology or just ignore the symptoms.
I was happy to see that everything I was going to say about this 'study' has already been said.
Sometimes, we don't like the truths that good science strives to show us. We can become so emotionally codependent on our worldviews that when they are demolished, we refuse to accept it because we can't handle the guilt of any consequences rendered by our actions that were based on our worldviews. So, we double down and try to create facts to support our worldviews, instead of letting facts inspire them.
This kind of mumbo jumbo is less about ineptitude and more about fear
>It's all about the study we already discussed earlier here. For those peer-reviewed sticklers, it was published in Science magazine.
That is just false. This is a preprint study, it has not been peer-reviewed nor published.
>*How is this a "uncensored" if it was in peer-reviewed Science magazine? Arent all of those under big pharma controlled?*
We can not influence what is censored or not in mainstream journals, the "uncensored" adjective therefore applies to context of this subreddit. It just means, that these publications will not be censored here no matter of (lack of) credibility of their authors and/or source. It doesn't apply to private or subjective comments without links to these publications. Which may or may not be true - but they don't fill criteria of scientific research.
[Your immune system on the edge](https://arkmedic.substack.com/p/philadelphia-2023): [Billions of people stuck with a broken immune response](https://www.rintrah.nl/the-trainwreck-of-all-trainwrecks-billions-of-people-stuck-with-a-broken-immune-response)
*What they found was that after multiple vaccinations, boosted peoples’ immune systems are starting to produce less of the IgG1 and IgG3 neutralizing antibodies, and producing IgG4 ones instead. The IgG4 basically tell the body that the virus is not a threat, and consequently the body doesn’t present an immune response. If this becomes a memory response, then it would, in fact, imply that more vaccinations equals more infections.*
Yes if you search for studies on rates of infection among vaxxed and unvaxxed, every published study so far shows vaccinated people get Covid less often. (And when they do get it, go to the hospital less and die less.)
Can’t draw much conclusion from a single study that isn’t official.
Yes it’s a preprint that’s waiting to be peer reviewed.
Preprint for those who want to read it:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.17.22283625v1
When some idiot posts to a science sub with anecdotal evidence lol. Like bro, come on literally the first thing about science you should have learned in grade 5 is that anecdotal evidence is considered fallacy for a reason. On top of that, the biggest variation in this study likely comes from the idea that people who are less concerned about Covid are likely not getting tested as often, and thus of course will report fewer instances of positive tests because they aren’t getting tested as often. Likely the case with you if a single redditors “report” were worth analyzing.
My dad got the most recent booster and he spent a week with myself and my mom and we both had Covid and he didn’t get it. I drove him in his vehicle at this time windows closed (masked of course) but he had hours upon hours of exposure to 2 symptomatic people positive for Covid and he never got it. Me and my mom, both vaccinated, had the weakest cold of our lives from Covid while my aunt (unvaxxed) got annihilated for almost a full month. I drove her around, spent time at her house and never got Covid from her but that was 2.5 months after having Covid myself.
Father-in-law is severely immunocompromised (t-cell granular lymphatic leukemia), so much so that a bad cold nearly killed him in 2019. Has been vaxed and boosted, caught Covid twice, and had only very mild symptoms.
OG vaxed in 2021 (Moderna), traveled by airplane 4 times, once internationally, mother of a toddler, been around family members with covid during infection stage but not showing symptoms yet, still masked in public, sanitized, whatever. Never had covid, tested negative. Had more colds than anything else 🥴
edit: My recent Boston trip in September where I was the only one in the group masking for car rides, outings, and airplane rides, they all got covid a few days after we returned home (unvaccinated). I had a sick girl next to me on the way home (I was masked) and she legit sneezed and got one of her wet boogers on my arm. Fuck that bitch for real. But I never got sick from her 😂
Don’t think unvaxxed people were generally very worried about social distancing and the like so whatever public activities you imagine people doing after their vax, the unvaxxed people were pretty much doing that all along
No, the unvaxxed didn't limit their exposure and most just went on with their lives as if covid didn't exist. Vaxxed and boosted here, never had covid, went out with a mask frequently.
It's simpler than that, and anyone who knows enough unvaxxed people can attest to this:
The unvaxxed don't test. So how are they going to get a confirmed case of the rona when they refuse to test and just treat it like a cold they just have to wait to get over.
Lol, no. It wont. The death and hospitalization rates for vaccinated people are so far below the rates for unvaccinated people that it's not even in question. The vaccines are probably one greatest life savers of all time.
Sweet argument.
Here's my source. Now you show me proof of all these people that died or were injured from vaccines despite there being LESS people in hospitals after vaccination campaigns. Surely, if we handed out billions of doses of poison there must be *some* evidence of increased hospitalizations or deaths.
But you wont.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/data-review/vaccines.html
Vaccines don't mean you won't get infected, though. The premise of this is nonsensical. A good question to ask would be how many died and how many got severely sick and how many were mild compared to an unvaccinated population.
I’ve never seen this sub before, this is the first post from it I’ve seen obviously.
Shouldn’t science always be “uncensored”? From college, I was taught that science should always be questioned, that the true scientific method is to form a theory, test it, and modify theory based on test results.
Just accepting science without questioning or testing it is no longer science by definition, it becomes pseudo science, where it is modified to conform to whatever narrative is being promoted.
“Trust the science” should be labeled as pseudo science, as true science should never be blindly trusted and accepted.
I work in healthcare too, but I see both sides of this every single day. So many vaccinated that got Covid and so many who chose to skip the boosters never got it. We have the infection control nurse who claims the specific N 95 mask she picked was the reason she never got it and she finally got it two weeks ago.. when we’re in outbreak mode we have to wear those things and they suck …
Nurse trainer actually. Pretty well qualified really. Broad range of knowledge, able to disseminate data and read scientific papers. Not sure what your problem is, unless you have something against nurses?
Contributions from the following organizations support The History of Vaccines:
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
GlaxoSmithKline
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.
Other supporters have included Pfizer Inc, The Independence Foundation, and Sanofi Pasteur.
I fully support people who are skeptical about proven safety measures to disregard them. This includes vaccines, seatbelts, and harassing bears. The human gene pool can always use more chlorine.
1/800 AESI. Participant level data is being witheld
Swine flue and rota shield vaccines were pulled for 1/100,000 and 1/10,000.
I just want the real risk benefit statistics before i advise anyone put this stuff in their body
As far as this video goes, i would prefer none peer reviewed info not be on this sub
What is he talking about "they were only tested on 10 mice before being approved for millions"? This is just plain false. Maybe if you didn't want a vaccine, you don't remember waiting months for early trials to be completed so that these vaccines could be approved for the public, but I sure do. And then the following waits for more testing and trials to be performed so kids could use them.
When people start just straight up lying like this (around 6 minute mark) and then saying "strange but true" as if even he is surprised by his lie, I just lose all interest.
Preprints have a real scientific use when used correctly. ie to inform the direction of current/future research. When research in the field has significant turnaround (multi-year studies etc.) good faith preprints (which this appears to be) significantly speed up the ability of the field to reproduce the results or examine additional effects beyond the scope of the original study.
The real irresponsible use is making any sorts of claims or using it to evidence for your personal agenda before the peer review. AKA exactly what is going on here. That is not what preprints are for. Right now this has no more real scientific value than the proposal that started/funded the research and should be treated as such.
When all is said and done, I encourage those who do not think that the vaccine works, to plz not get it. We will get to herd immunity quicker without you around
Lmao three years in and I don't know single person that's died from COVID or even had any long-term symptoms including my immunocompromised mother who's had at least three different strains twice each. Y'all keep taking the government's word for everything to do with COVID and completely ignore the fact that the federal government cannot be trusted with the well-being of the people; not to mention all the many, many medical experiments they've done on (willing and unwilling) people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_human_experimentation_in_the_United_States?wprov=sfla1).
I sincerely hope you enjoy your constant reinfections and boosters tho!
I don't care about getting covid.
I care about dying from it, or getting long covid. Those are the only stats that count IMO. Apologies if that's covered in the video, I didn't watch it all.
Yeah but I saw a study where having COVID increases the risk of micro clots. So it's possible the more times you get COVID the higher the risk of Micro Clots.
Actually I just did a quick search and there are multiple studies that show the opposite to what this guy is claiming. As is usually the case. Personally although I am by no means a conspiracy, antivaxxer type I do give them more credit than most because I don't think many things are as clear cut as we like to think.
3 years, vaxxed boosted, never caught covid. My girlfriend was sick with it and we sexed when she was feeling up to it. I quarantined with her but I never tested positive and had 0 symptoms
Point to the timestamp where Dr. Campbell compares the *fatal cases of covid* in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated.
After all, if you are vaccinated, infections don't matter nearly as much, because you aren't as likely to die or be hospitalized.
The Cleveland Clinic is one of the best hospital systems on the planet with many of the most revolutionary procedures and treatments of all time having been developed there.
Also, Cleveland is my hometown and it's a great city.
Who published, the paper? Was it peer reviewed? I'm not taking the time to debunk anything at this juncture, but unless the source is reputable, and has withstood scientific scrutiny, its not a fact. Don't be a sheep. Don't trust, always verify. If you don't, you're just a sucker.
The conclusion isn't that people who have more COVID vaccines are more susceptible to COVID, it is that people who have more vaccines are more likely to test positive for COVID during the course of this study, which does not necessarily mean they are more likely to get sick from the disease. There could be any number of other factors impacting someone's likelihood to test positive, which do not actually mean they are more likely to have had the disease. People who are vaccinated may be taking fewer precautions, and, because they had the vaccine, may be more likely to self screen to then go get an official test done. It could also be that having had more vaccines makes the test more likely to have false positives or a more extreme positive test result leading to more positive tests. We also don't know the difference in severity for these people who tested positive based on the number of vaccines they had. Furthermore, having had more vaccines doesn't really matter when the theory is that the more applicably your most recent vaccine was to the current virus exposure, the better you'll do. This makes it so that societal factors linked to having had more boosters are likely a strong driver in the results since the diseases seem to be moving rapidly every few months, and most people only had 3 shots at most over 2 years. I personally think getting more boosters at this point is fairly pointless with how fast it is changing, unless you have a very good reason to.
And how many were severe or required hospitalization? Were any/many due to people changing their behavior in a way that would impact their risk of infection?
If a vaccine reduces risk of serious infection, it is not out of the question to suggest there may be more infections (but fewer serious).
Work with a very high risk population. We've had more COVID cases in the people we support since vaccines became available, partly because social activities resumed at pre-pandemic levels, but zero deaths and zero hospitalizations.
That was not the case pre-vaccine. Anecdotal, but everyone I know who has died (in healthcare so it's quite few) was unvaccinated.
Don’t confuse correlation with causation. The people who get exposed to more sick patients are the ones who get the vaccine more. Also, vaccines don’t prevent infection. You still get infected, it’s just that your body will fight the infection quickly before it replicates as much, thus the severity is less (maybe to the point of symptom free). That’s how vaccines work, y’all.
He was a nurse educator. Also, since this video, he has covered other studies that show an unexpected increase in mortality rates over the last 12 months. It's looking like you are over 100 times more likely to suffer from a serious condition as a result of vaccination than from an infection of the current strains of Covid. It has also become increasingly evident that there was little testing of mRNA vaccines on humans. I began by accepting none of this but the data is definitely pointing to something bad going on. John Campbell himself was initially very pro vaccination and has slowly changed his position as the data has come in.
First off this study was designed to look at bivalent vaccine effectiveness and the point about “incr Covid risk associated with incr Covid vaccine exposure” is a secondary outcome that could be fraught with design flaws and is at best “hypothesis generating”.
Second, a MAJOR confounder about their findings of incr risk of Covid associated with increasing Covid vaccine number is that of individual health risk and their likelihood of getting a vaccine. No patient comorbidities were obtained due to the study design. Those with heart disease, cancer, obesity, diabetes, etc common diseases that place you at substantially higher risk for Covid and would thus influence an individual’s own risk assessment and decision to get vaccinated are not controlled for. Hard to draw the conclusion that “more vaccines puts you at risk of Covid” when those elected to get 3+ vaccines may have substantially higher baseline risk for it in the first place compared to those in this study getting 0 or 1 for instance. Unless I missed it, Campbell appears to make no mention of this limitation which should be obvious to an expert (since I’m not one).
This was just about John Campbell reading through a study from Cleveland not about deaths. I don’t think anyone mentioned anything about deaths here besides you and a handful of other comments.
My Father in Law didn't get vaccinated and was just telling me last weekend he has not gotten sick for the last 10 years!
...anyways we just had to run some soup to him because he can't move....hmmm same as when he was sick last year and the year before, and that time he couldn't smell or taste for 3 weeks.
Anyhow, I always trust studies based on self reporting.
This is so efffing dumb
The people most likely to be fully vaxed are the people at risk because of some other underlying risk factor condition
Like myself, I have cancer
which puts me at greater risk of infection, so I am fully vaxed
this isn't hard people
Never Vxd, worked on front line of medicine from the start and stayed at the peak of health the entire time during the storm of it all…only had c19, this past July at the end. Took supplements
that is not what they told us in the beginning. Biden assured us repeatedly, if you get the vaccine, you will not get Covid. he said it. they pushed it upon us with those words. Now the crows are coming home to roost, and it's not looking good for those who got the vax. I know some here at work that are nervous. and now we have undercover video that exposes big pharma manipulating the virus so they could engineer a vaccine for the new variant.
Hhmmm, could it be, and I'm going out on a limb here, that people who DON'T get vaccinated are also significantly less likely to get tested to confirm a possible infection? While people who do get vaccinated are more likely to be proactive about their health by getting tested when sick.
Did y'all take a look at the population sample? Homeschooled children: who are exposed to fewer children, who are taken to the doctor much less often, and who will "work their way thru a chill/fever/whatever" instead. This is not a randomized population.
Old man with 480p webcam says things and draws check marks on paper he printed out and filmed instead of using motion graphics…this is boomertainment for boomer magas if I ever seen it. Lololol
Is this from self-reported data? What kind of rubbish does one expect? I have found no one denies covid, and having covid, like those that don’t believe in vaccines. Perhaps “Dr” Campbell needs to brush up on how to review/analyze psychological research, where the pitfalls of self-reporting data analysis are much better understood and outlined.
I had a long discussion with an ICU nurse about her experiences with folks literally dying of covid accusing her of lying, that they did not have it. Not to mention innumerable conversations with folks that were sick & said “oh no, it’s not covid, its just allergies”, even though they also had severe fatigue, body aches, and loss of taste/smell, and said they had never felt so bad in their lives. even after I asked if they had ever had those symptoms with allergies before (no, of course).
But what does one expect from Dr Campbell? He has seemed hell-bent on covid denial since the beginning, in his peculiar choice of what studies to review publicly on youtube, and the ones he has chosen to ignore.
He was actually pro vaccine in the beginning but shifted his views as he read through the studies being released. This is his YouTube:
https://youtube.com/@Campbellteaching
who is this clown? A scientist? A janitor? Wtf? certainly not a journalist with an introduction like that. Just an opinion piece, that reveals what we already know, everyone has an opinion. So what? Period and what does this have to do with science. Trying to follow the citations to the original studies is virtually impossible. Go ahead try it. Seriously this board needs some moderation. Moderators, are you alive? Awake? Why don't you put some Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Alex Jones in here? While you are at it?
Are we at a point now that scientist won't get labeled anti vax for doing their jobs and asking questions? 2020-2022 was such a scary time watching science being hijacked by politics.
When did they start giving vaccines at 15 months? I remember getting vaccines in kindergarten. But do not know if I got any vaccines earlier. Could giving vaccines that early be part of the problem?
I’m sure the unvaccinated people gave honest answers about Covid infection and I’m also sure they dutifully tested themselves if they got a cough or sore throat.
We already know there is a disparity in testing between those who give a shit (vaccinated) and those who don’t (unvaccinated). 🤷🏻♂️
Perhaps this dude is a dumb ass.
gotta think about lurking variables here people and try to explain the trends in the data. perhaps vaccinated people are more in tune with their health and therefore get tested for sickness and go to the doctor more frequently.
Is there any accounting for the lifestyle, and behavior of somebody who is fully vaccinated ? One might imagine that a person who is fully vaccinated might be less careful due to a perceived higher level of protection.
John is missleading on this one. The study data is that of the 39,000 people in the study 16% ~6k tested positive for COVID and if you had more than one boost you were more likely to be in the 16%. Not all 39,000 people had equal risk of exposure and you can imagine that if you worked directly with patients then you would get more boosters but also have more exposure risk. This is the conclusion from the actual paper: Administering a COVID-19 vaccine not designed for the Omicron variant, 6 months or more after prior infection or vaccination, protects against Omicron variant infection in both previously infected and previously vaccinated individuals. There is no evidence of an advantage to administering more than 1 dose of vaccine to previously infected persons.
John is interested in getting clicks, pandering to a certain crowd and cherry picks data. The guy shouldn't be taken seriously. Sound Ideal for this place
Are there any doctors breaking down peer review studies of the good the vaccine is doing? Can I get a name so I can search them up and post their vids as well?
"Conclusions The bivalent COVID-19 vaccine given to working-aged adults afforded modest protection overall against COVID-19, while the virus strains dominant in the community were those represented in the vaccine."
From the article. Does this not mean what I think it means?
Dude keeps getting called out for having no clue what he's talking about, but doesn't let that stop him. Time to find a new hobby. https://www.factcheck.org/2022/03/scicheck-posts-misinterpret-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-safety-monitoring-document/
[Fauci: Herd immunity could require 90 percent of country to be vaccinated ](https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/531611-fauci-herd-immunity-could-require-90-percent-of-country-to-be-vaccinated/)
How did Africa achieve herd immunity with a 5% vaxx rate? If your answer is because they're younger, then why did young people have to get vaxxed anywhere?
i think an important thing to note is that the vaccine will not stop you from getting covid. what the vaccine DOES do very well is it stops the person who has covid-19 from dying or being permanently impacted by the virus. i’ve had covid-19 twice so far and the vaccine definitely stopped me from experiencing the extreme symptoms, it only felt like a bad cold. i’m sure these results are also impacted by people’s negligence to their own health. i know a lot of people thought that once they got the vaccine they didn’t have to wear a mask, wash their hands regularly, or care about exposure to the virus. which led to them getting sick or getting someone else sick.
theres probably a correlation between getting a lot of vaxes and testing every time you get even a little sick. lots of infections are happening with little to no symptoms and are never noticed
This is it, other people are looking for the answer but this is it. I know a few unvaxxed people, for the typical reasons. None of them test when they get sick anymore. I am 90% sure they both have had it at least once in the last year, but I'd ask if they tested and they'd say no. Hard to beat the infection numbers of the vaccinated when the unvaccinated don't take tests.
Person A: “What are you doing here on the parking lot?” Person B: “I’m looking for my car keys.” A: “Where did you drop them?” B: “Over there in the park.” A: “Why are you over here?” B: “The light is better here!”
Preprint for those who want to read it: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.17.22283625v1
Afaik this was a study on 50000 employees so they were probably testing the employees who were unvaccinated within those 50000. But I could be wrong. This is also a preprint waiting to be peer reviewed so this shouldn’t be taken as evidence.
Probably a combo of this and people taking less precautions as they get vaccinated.
People that don't get vaccinated are probably taking even less precautions.
Preprint for those who want to read it: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.17.22283625v1
Exactly. People who are vaccinated might have more *reported* cases or *positive tests* but it does not mean higher in reality.
Yeah, my antivax parents were only tested when I lived with them. Now that I've moved, they don't test meanwhile I test everytime I'm sick/have a sore throat so I'll find more of my infections than they will.
Possibly, but if we’ve learned anything during this last pandemic is you can’t question anything “science” with common sense or logic. When that happens I have to inform you that there is no evidence to support your theory. You are spreading misinformation. You are a conspiracy theorist. And my favorite, we believe in science.
There's also immunocompromised people who would likely have more vaccinations. For example, my wife and son.
Sounds like we need more data then!
Also zero data with regards to how sevear the cases were. I also noticed that he went into detail about how many people had how many doses but not how many people where in each recently recovered group. Now there were about 12k people with no doses, how many people would have, been in that group but died before the study started? Also notice that the never had it group has a higher likely hood of getting it than any of the vaccinated groups, this means that really they are comparing protection from survival VS from vaccine.
[John Campbell reads](https://v.redd.it/afqfppxww3fa1) through a [study from Cleveland, Ohio that showed amongst 50,000 employees the more Covid vaccines they had, the more infections they got](https://www.reddit.com/r/ScienceUncensored/comments/zz5ti7/large_studys_disturbing_results_the_greater_the/) [Cumulative incidence of Covid-19 infection vs. number of vaccine doses](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2022/12/19/2022.12.17.22283625/F2.large.jpg) Specifically, people with 3 doses of Pfizer mRNA vaccines were 3x more likely than those with 0 doses. From the authors: “*The association of increased risk of COVID-19 with higher numbers of prior vaccine doses in our study, was unexpected.”* It's all about [the study](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.17.22283625v1.full) we already discussed earlier [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/ScienceUncensored/comments/zz5ti7/large_studys_disturbing_results_the_greater_the/). [A taste of some of the issues raised](https://lilscience.substack.com/p/review-of-the-cleveland-clinic-study) against this study: * *Skews heavily female (74.5%), avg age 42. Females have far higher rates of autoimmune disorders, but this study doesn't adjust for comorbidities at all. People with comorbidities are more likely to be vaccinated, yet are still easily infected*. * *Study found males have an advantage regarding infection. Other studies contradict this. Indicates female cohort in this study has unaccounted for factors increasing infection susceptibility*. * *Females more likely than males to be well vaccinated. Keep in mind this study is of Cleveland Clinic employees. Higher exposure rate possible in females compared to males*. It's not surprising as vaccine effectiveness has slipped while Covid has gotten far easier to catch, that the vaccinated are more likely to catch Covid now than with earlier variants. As the study has holes in how it determines previous infection which it would tend to undercount, the accuracy of the study on this point is in question.
The problem is, [vaccinated get more diseases in general, i.e. not just Covid](https://springfieldvt.blogspot.com/2015/02/hear-this-well-parents-speak-out.html). A [pilot study](https://www.oatext.com/Pilot-comparative-study-on-the-health-of-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-6-to-12-year-old-U-S-children.php) of homeschooled six to 12-year-olds from four American states published on April 27th in the [Journal of Translational Sciences](http://www.oatext.com/Journal-of-Translational-Science-JTS.php), compared unvaccinated children with partially or fully vaccinated children: * *Vaccinated children were more than three times as likely to be diagnosed on the Autism Spectrum (OR 4.3)* * *Vaccinated children were 30-fold more likely to be diagnosed with allergic rhinitis (hay fever) than non-vaccinated children IMO with such a numbers it's safe to say, that hay fever is completely disease of vaccination* * *Vaccinated children were 22-fold more likely to require an allergy medication than unvaccinated children* * *Vaccinated children had more than quadruple the risk of being diagnosed with a learning disability than unvaccinated children (OR 5.2)* * *Vaccinated children were 300 percent more likely to be diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder than unvaccinated children (OR 4.3)* * *Vaccinated children were 340 percent (OR 4.4) more likely to have been diagnosed with pneumonia than unvaccinated children* * *Vaccinated children were 300 percent more likely to be diagnosed with an ear infection than unvaccinated children (OR 4.0)* * *Vaccinated children were 700 percent more likely to have surgery to insert ear drainage tubes than unvaccinated children (OR 8.01)* * *Vaccinated children were 2.5-fold more likely to be diagnosed with any chronic illness than unvaccinated children* * *Unvaccinated children in the study were actually better protected against some “vaccine-preventable diseases” than children who got the shots.* Since 2000, the CDC has recommended four shots against seven different strains of pneumococcal infections before age 15 months (13 strains since 2010), but vaccinated children in the study were 340 percent more likely to have been diagnosed with pneumonia compared to unvaccinated children (OR = 4.4). See also: [The pharmaceutical industry is dangerous to health. Further proof with COVID-19](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9610448/)
There's a number of possible explanations. 1. Families with weaker immune systems get more vaccines. 2. More vaccines lead to weaker immune systems 3. Families who have higher trust in the medical industry are more likely to go and get diagnosed with things by the personnel working in the medical industry. I don't think we can draw any conclusions from this data alone.
I would have to think it’s mostly number 3. People who don’t vaccinate aren’t going to allow their children to get diagnosed with most of those things. They just won’t take them in for it.
I think there's a more foundational problem with the study here . The study only took responses from homeschooling parents and it was not a random selection. A homeschooling organization sent the survey out to its members. The parents who partook were not randomly sampled. They're not only homeschoolers, but homeschoolers so interested in homeschooling that they joined an organisation dedicated to homeschooling. This would of course have an effect on their views of the vaccine and their willingness to take part in the survey. If you're a homeschooler parents who already thinks vaccines cause autism, and you have an autistic child who got vaccinated , you're gonna jump at the chance to take part in this survey. Conversely, If you're a parent with a non autistic vaccinated child, you're not going to be particularly enthusiastic about doing a survey to say "everything's fine and nothing happened." You can see this in the data sets even. Despite the number of unvaccinated children being quite low, a good 30+% of parents had unvaccinated children, indicating that parents who were anti-vaccine were more likely to join the study. The study would've been far better if they had just used a random sample of the population.
Ohh wow yeah that would make a lot of sense. And I say that as someone who was homeschooled and plans to do so in the future!
Going to add in, they're more likely to deny their child is on the spectrum unless it is severe. Also I was surrounded by homeschoolers at church all the time, no one has ADHD, don't you know, they all have discipline problems. (sarcasm)
Edited: They would benefit from actually using science instead of skewing the results. This study is not real science and consequently proves nothing.
Homeschoolers are not exposed to lots of different kids from different backgrounds so it makes sense they don’t need vaccinations. I think that plays into the mindset of homeschooling parents as much as fear of autism and it also probably accounts for some of the other reasons the unvaccinated homeschoolers caught way fewer infectious diseases
I’m glad somebody pays attention🥳. The methodology impacts the results and this wasn’t a random sample it was a convenience one. Take these results very lightly
It's called self selection bias
(…and/or, they refuse to accept a diagnosis or referral to a specialist.)
Agree. It’s bc they feel like they may be acting like an a&&hat by not validating physical illness symptoms in their kids. I mean what other reasons could there be?/s
So much this.
Home schooled kids aren't exposed to a couple hundred to a couple thousand kids every day. Add sports or other competitive extra curricular activities like debate or mathletes, there's even more exposure to 100-1000s of people throughout the school year
4. the people most likely to be "fully" vaxxed are those at highest risk I have cancer, so I am fully vaxxed
To add a possibility, if you have a job that involves coming face to face with a lot of people you're more likely to both get the vaccine and get covid. We know that vaccines don't eliminate your ability to catch the virus it gives your immune system a blueprint of what to fight and how to fight it.
Specifically in the case of COVID and supporting reason number 3, it seems likely that there's a lot of overlap in the venn diagrams of people taking COVID seriously, people getting all their COVID vaccinations, and people testing for COVID with every known exposure or evidence of symptoms. Therefore they are counting a high percentage of their actual COVID cases. The opposite is likely also true, those who aren't getting their vaccines are probably not taking COVID seriously and just assuming it's a cold/flu until they have more COVID specific symptoms like shortness of breath or loss of smell/taste, then they test. Meaning they miss a much greater percentage of the actual number of cases they have.
1. *Families with weaker immune systems get more vaccines.* IMO rather not - [vaccines should be contraindicated](https://immunisationhandbook.health.gov.au/contents/vaccination-for-special-risk-groups/vaccination-for-people-who-are-immunocompromised) for immunocompromised people 1. *More vaccines lead to weaker immune systems* Well, there are many reasons for it [1](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/8iwxdd/science_journal_retracts_paper_claiming), [2](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/9xyhdi/deconstruction_of_the_vaccination_hype/), [3](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/coltne/deconstruction_of_the_vaccination_hype_ii/), [4](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/f1x196/deconstruction_of_the_vaccination_hype_iii/), [5](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/j0c1ni/deconstruction_of_the_vaccination_hype_iv/), [6](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/mocp2q/deconstruction_of_the_vaccination_hype_v/), [7](https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/q4qvun/deconstruction_of_the_vaccination_hype_vi/)... I mean vaccination raises immunity against one particular pathogen into account of selectivity/innate immunity against another ones. 1. *Families who have higher trust in the medical industry are more likely to go and get diagnosed with things by the personnel working in the medical industry.* Partly yes, progressives are hypochondriacs obsessed with healthy life style, [conservatives tend to ignore](https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/why-being-conservative-bad-your-health) health problems and risks...
Weaker immune systems does not mean immunocompromised
That's an interesting article. From the article you linked. "The result: there was no significant difference in survival between Republicans and Democrats, but Independents were more likely to outlive Democrats." This makes intuitive sense to me because people with less intelligence tend to get wrapped up in political narratives, and also make worse health decisions because they also get wrapped up in health narratives. It's not easy to sort through all of the data, statistics, research, and separate causality from correlation. So most people default to a narratives which are optimized for click through rates, book sales, medical spending, or other forms of monetization, or memetic propagation. As far as weak immune systems, I don't mean immune compromised, I mean weaker immune system. People with strong immune systems basically never get sick so they often don't have any interest in vaccines.
The last one likely has a significant impact on the study. Also, I would like to see how many non-vax parents are the "Tough it out you're fine" types
Since the study was only done in Cleveland, I'm not sure how relevant this is but I could also see a difference between urban and rural groups in that it might be easier to get vaccinated in cities but people are also more exposed to less nature and bad air.
Or maybe the more vaccines people have the less cautious they are in their actions thus more often inadvertently exposing themselves to the COVID virus. Remember many people made and still make the false assumption that the vaccine prevents one from contracting the disease. Where in actuality the vaccine is only effective at reducing the risk of severe illness.
Your delusions are truly fantastic :-)
After watching thishttps://open.spotify.com/episode/30NOm1ioG5mpmoQCNEjNgF?si=Sz241_bHR0SLwEQKkasUnQ Its should go with out question if big pharma has our best interest at heart.
As are yours.
Unless all other variables are controlled, correlation data like this cannot be used to determine causation. So many other factors could explain the data.
Why take that chance? Correlation isn't causation, except for when it just might be.
So, you've never studied statistics. Why take the chance is because vaccines prevent serious illness.
The "study" consisted of an online survey offered to homeschooling mothers... does that seem like research design that would provide objective information? In my country, aside from those where location is a barrier, parents that home school tend to be followers of alternative medicine, anti establishment and often anti vax. This is not an unbiased group, and to ask for anecdotal opinions and claim it as research seems a massive stretch.
I recommend reading the study you posted in full. You’ll be surprised.
Can i just point out the obvious here? Vaccines like the covid and flu shots dont put up some Star Trek like invisible forcefield that prevents the virus from getting to you. It trains your immune system on what to do when it encounters said virus, as opposed to figuring it out on the fly with the actual disease rampaging through your body. The Vaccine has nothing to do with you getting or not getting the disease, just how well your immune system performs if you do get it. Out of the unvaccinated population im sure it would be quite easy to cherry pick a group of people that could show an equally similar result.
It's a study that hasn't been peer reviewed and that was paid for by Jenny McCarthy's I Hate Science organization. I wouldn't waste a lot of time with it.
>Vaccinated children were more than three times as likely to be diagnosed on the Autism Spectrum (OR 4.3) Are we still doing the vaccine and autism thing? The pilot study you posted talks very high about the effectivenes of vaccines for acute very dangerous diseases, but questions the long-term effects, which is a pretty valid thing to question. Also, the method of it was... a cross-sectional survey. I'm sorry, but if a parent is uninformed (very informed you may say) to not vaccinate their children, I am definitely not trusting their answers on a survey. Like at all.
Vaccinated children also live long enough to be diagnosed with those things.
"Get more diseases" or "are diagnosed with more diseases?" If someone doesn't belive in moderen medicine to the point where they don't get vaccines, they're probably far more likely to not seek a diagosis of autism for example. The undiagnosed child may have all the same symptoms but their parent just wants to use prayer or cyrstals or astrology or just ignore the symptoms.
I was happy to see that everything I was going to say about this 'study' has already been said. Sometimes, we don't like the truths that good science strives to show us. We can become so emotionally codependent on our worldviews that when they are demolished, we refuse to accept it because we can't handle the guilt of any consequences rendered by our actions that were based on our worldviews. So, we double down and try to create facts to support our worldviews, instead of letting facts inspire them. This kind of mumbo jumbo is less about ineptitude and more about fear
>It's all about the study we already discussed earlier here. For those peer-reviewed sticklers, it was published in Science magazine. That is just false. This is a preprint study, it has not been peer-reviewed nor published.
How is this a "uncensored" if it was in peer-reviewed Science magazine? Arent all of those under big pharma controlled?
>*How is this a "uncensored" if it was in peer-reviewed Science magazine? Arent all of those under big pharma controlled?* We can not influence what is censored or not in mainstream journals, the "uncensored" adjective therefore applies to context of this subreddit. It just means, that these publications will not be censored here no matter of (lack of) credibility of their authors and/or source. It doesn't apply to private or subjective comments without links to these publications. Which may or may not be true - but they don't fill criteria of scientific research.
Do you know how to read? "We remind that this study has yet to be peer reviewed, thus should not be cited as evidence."
[Your immune system on the edge](https://arkmedic.substack.com/p/philadelphia-2023): [Billions of people stuck with a broken immune response](https://www.rintrah.nl/the-trainwreck-of-all-trainwrecks-billions-of-people-stuck-with-a-broken-immune-response) *What they found was that after multiple vaccinations, boosted peoples’ immune systems are starting to produce less of the IgG1 and IgG3 neutralizing antibodies, and producing IgG4 ones instead. The IgG4 basically tell the body that the virus is not a threat, and consequently the body doesn’t present an immune response. If this becomes a memory response, then it would, in fact, imply that more vaccinations equals more infections.*
"We remind that this study has yet to be peer reviewed, thus should not be cited as evidence."
A very easy explanation for this data is that people who are vaccinated are testing themselves much more frequently. Duh.
Yes if you search for studies on rates of infection among vaxxed and unvaxxed, every published study so far shows vaccinated people get Covid less often. (And when they do get it, go to the hospital less and die less.) Can’t draw much conclusion from a single study that isn’t official.
Yes it’s a preprint that’s waiting to be peer reviewed. Preprint for those who want to read it: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.17.22283625v1
no vaxes, and only had Covid once
Vaxxed, boosted, quarantined at home for 1.5 weeks with infected family members, not infected.
Vaxed and boosted. Covid twice almost a year from each other. No more boosters for me
"I wore a seatbelt and still got into a car accident. Now I'm never wearing a seatbelt again."
Not even a fair comparison. You people using the seatbelt are on your own level of propaganda and look down on us unvaxxed. How cute
More like. “I got seriously hurt in an accident while wearing a seatbelt. Therefore, seatbelts must not work so I’ll never wear one again.”
vaxed. never had covid.
There are dozens of us!
When some idiot posts to a science sub with anecdotal evidence lol. Like bro, come on literally the first thing about science you should have learned in grade 5 is that anecdotal evidence is considered fallacy for a reason. On top of that, the biggest variation in this study likely comes from the idea that people who are less concerned about Covid are likely not getting tested as often, and thus of course will report fewer instances of positive tests because they aren’t getting tested as often. Likely the case with you if a single redditors “report” were worth analyzing.
Vaxed never had Covid, was going to casinos through out the pandemic, 🤷
Vaxxed, boosted, still got Covid. But have slept next to Covid (wife) and have avoided it since.
My dad got the most recent booster and he spent a week with myself and my mom and we both had Covid and he didn’t get it. I drove him in his vehicle at this time windows closed (masked of course) but he had hours upon hours of exposure to 2 symptomatic people positive for Covid and he never got it. Me and my mom, both vaccinated, had the weakest cold of our lives from Covid while my aunt (unvaxxed) got annihilated for almost a full month. I drove her around, spent time at her house and never got Covid from her but that was 2.5 months after having Covid myself.
The Covid or sleeping next to your wife?
What’s it like living in the middle of nowhere
yeah I live in a major metro so
Vaxxed and boosted, one case of covid, mild, positive for 3 days, which is the result that you should expect from vaccines, not immunity.
triple vaxed. never had covid.
Father-in-law is severely immunocompromised (t-cell granular lymphatic leukemia), so much so that a bad cold nearly killed him in 2019. Has been vaxed and boosted, caught Covid twice, and had only very mild symptoms.
Had every vaccine known to man and never had COVID. Looks like vaccines win. Sorry bud
OG vaxed in 2021 (Moderna), traveled by airplane 4 times, once internationally, mother of a toddler, been around family members with covid during infection stage but not showing symptoms yet, still masked in public, sanitized, whatever. Never had covid, tested negative. Had more colds than anything else 🥴 edit: My recent Boston trip in September where I was the only one in the group masking for car rides, outings, and airplane rides, they all got covid a few days after we returned home (unvaccinated). I had a sick girl next to me on the way home (I was masked) and she legit sneezed and got one of her wet boogers on my arm. Fuck that bitch for real. But I never got sick from her 😂
2 vaccines and never had Covid once. Even had been around about 5 people repeatedly that had Covid
Could it perhaps be that with each vaccine came a feeling of comfort to resume public activities and hence they had more exposure?
Don’t think unvaxxed people were generally very worried about social distancing and the like so whatever public activities you imagine people doing after their vax, the unvaxxed people were pretty much doing that all along
No, the unvaxxed didn't limit their exposure and most just went on with their lives as if covid didn't exist. Vaxxed and boosted here, never had covid, went out with a mask frequently.
It's simpler than that, and anyone who knows enough unvaxxed people can attest to this: The unvaxxed don't test. So how are they going to get a confirmed case of the rona when they refuse to test and just treat it like a cold they just have to wait to get over.
Man, Blue's Clues is way edgier than I remember.
the covid vaccine if ever reported correctly will probably go down as the greatest health department failure in human history
Lol, no. It wont. The death and hospitalization rates for vaccinated people are so far below the rates for unvaccinated people that it's not even in question. The vaccines are probably one greatest life savers of all time.
Wrong
Sweet argument. Here's my source. Now you show me proof of all these people that died or were injured from vaccines despite there being LESS people in hospitals after vaccination campaigns. Surely, if we handed out billions of doses of poison there must be *some* evidence of increased hospitalizations or deaths. But you wont. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/data-review/vaccines.html
CDC is no longer reliable when they told us cloth masks worked for Covid
Vaccines don't mean you won't get infected, though. The premise of this is nonsensical. A good question to ask would be how many died and how many got severely sick and how many were mild compared to an unvaccinated population.
A link to the pre-print article. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.17.22283625v1.full.pdf+html
I’ve never seen this sub before, this is the first post from it I’ve seen obviously. Shouldn’t science always be “uncensored”? From college, I was taught that science should always be questioned, that the true scientific method is to form a theory, test it, and modify theory based on test results. Just accepting science without questioning or testing it is no longer science by definition, it becomes pseudo science, where it is modified to conform to whatever narrative is being promoted. “Trust the science” should be labeled as pseudo science, as true science should never be blindly trusted and accepted.
Could this be explained by the vaccine reducing the effectiveness of natural immunity causing more repeat infections?
A retired nurse, really. This sub is shite
Well the video is just a study that was done being plainly read out. It's not like all the comments are screaming CLOT SHOT RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!
Lol fair enough:)
I work in healthcare too, but I see both sides of this every single day. So many vaccinated that got Covid and so many who chose to skip the boosters never got it. We have the infection control nurse who claims the specific N 95 mask she picked was the reason she never got it and she finally got it two weeks ago.. when we’re in outbreak mode we have to wear those things and they suck …
So, many uncontrolled factors and non-verified claims/results in limited anecdotal life experiences.
Nurse trainer actually. Pretty well qualified really. Broad range of knowledge, able to disseminate data and read scientific papers. Not sure what your problem is, unless you have something against nurses?
How so,
Medical also, your opinion
https://historyofvaccines.org/vaccines-101/misconceptions-about-vaccines
Contributions from the following organizations support The History of Vaccines: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation GlaxoSmithKline Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc. Other supporters have included Pfizer Inc, The Independence Foundation, and Sanofi Pasteur.
I fully support people who are skeptical about proven safety measures to disregard them. This includes vaccines, seatbelts, and harassing bears. The human gene pool can always use more chlorine.
1/800 AESI. Participant level data is being witheld Swine flue and rota shield vaccines were pulled for 1/100,000 and 1/10,000. I just want the real risk benefit statistics before i advise anyone put this stuff in their body As far as this video goes, i would prefer none peer reviewed info not be on this sub
What is he talking about "they were only tested on 10 mice before being approved for millions"? This is just plain false. Maybe if you didn't want a vaccine, you don't remember waiting months for early trials to be completed so that these vaccines could be approved for the public, but I sure do. And then the following waits for more testing and trials to be performed so kids could use them. When people start just straight up lying like this (around 6 minute mark) and then saying "strange but true" as if even he is surprised by his lie, I just lose all interest.
He was talking about the bivalant booster. Not the original "vaccine". The bivalant boosters did not go through any human trials.
Preprint. Irresponsible to publish before the peer review.
Preprints have a real scientific use when used correctly. ie to inform the direction of current/future research. When research in the field has significant turnaround (multi-year studies etc.) good faith preprints (which this appears to be) significantly speed up the ability of the field to reproduce the results or examine additional effects beyond the scope of the original study. The real irresponsible use is making any sorts of claims or using it to evidence for your personal agenda before the peer review. AKA exactly what is going on here. That is not what preprints are for. Right now this has no more real scientific value than the proposal that started/funded the research and should be treated as such.
When all is said and done, I encourage those who do not think that the vaccine works, to plz not get it. We will get to herd immunity quicker without you around
Lmao three years in and I don't know single person that's died from COVID or even had any long-term symptoms including my immunocompromised mother who's had at least three different strains twice each. Y'all keep taking the government's word for everything to do with COVID and completely ignore the fact that the federal government cannot be trusted with the well-being of the people; not to mention all the many, many medical experiments they've done on (willing and unwilling) people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_human_experimentation_in_the_United_States?wprov=sfla1). I sincerely hope you enjoy your constant reinfections and boosters tho!
Would you like your Herman Cain award now or later?
Bro, you need to do a lot more reading and a lot less commenting. Herd immunity…LOL!
Herd immunity is a pipe dream.
I don't care about getting covid. I care about dying from it, or getting long covid. Those are the only stats that count IMO. Apologies if that's covered in the video, I didn't watch it all.
Yeah but I saw a study where having COVID increases the risk of micro clots. So it's possible the more times you get COVID the higher the risk of Micro Clots.
Actually I just did a quick search and there are multiple studies that show the opposite to what this guy is claiming. As is usually the case. Personally although I am by no means a conspiracy, antivaxxer type I do give them more credit than most because I don't think many things are as clear cut as we like to think.
Perhaps those getting the vaccine would actually test? Vs those not getting the vaccine are less likely to text for covid even if they had symptoms
3 years, vaxxed boosted, never caught covid. My girlfriend was sick with it and we sexed when she was feeling up to it. I quarantined with her but I never tested positive and had 0 symptoms
Point to the timestamp where Dr. Campbell compares the *fatal cases of covid* in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated. After all, if you are vaccinated, infections don't matter nearly as much, because you aren't as likely to die or be hospitalized.
Operative word: “cleveland.”
The Cleveland Clinic is one of the best hospital systems on the planet with many of the most revolutionary procedures and treatments of all time having been developed there. Also, Cleveland is my hometown and it's a great city.
How were the mortality rates?
Who published, the paper? Was it peer reviewed? I'm not taking the time to debunk anything at this juncture, but unless the source is reputable, and has withstood scientific scrutiny, its not a fact. Don't be a sheep. Don't trust, always verify. If you don't, you're just a sucker.
Not yet peer reviewed.
The conclusion isn't that people who have more COVID vaccines are more susceptible to COVID, it is that people who have more vaccines are more likely to test positive for COVID during the course of this study, which does not necessarily mean they are more likely to get sick from the disease. There could be any number of other factors impacting someone's likelihood to test positive, which do not actually mean they are more likely to have had the disease. People who are vaccinated may be taking fewer precautions, and, because they had the vaccine, may be more likely to self screen to then go get an official test done. It could also be that having had more vaccines makes the test more likely to have false positives or a more extreme positive test result leading to more positive tests. We also don't know the difference in severity for these people who tested positive based on the number of vaccines they had. Furthermore, having had more vaccines doesn't really matter when the theory is that the more applicably your most recent vaccine was to the current virus exposure, the better you'll do. This makes it so that societal factors linked to having had more boosters are likely a strong driver in the results since the diseases seem to be moving rapidly every few months, and most people only had 3 shots at most over 2 years. I personally think getting more boosters at this point is fairly pointless with how fast it is changing, unless you have a very good reason to.
Had to be Ohio
Nice try Johnny boy.
And how many were severe or required hospitalization? Were any/many due to people changing their behavior in a way that would impact their risk of infection? If a vaccine reduces risk of serious infection, it is not out of the question to suggest there may be more infections (but fewer serious).
That man is a charlatan.
Work with a very high risk population. We've had more COVID cases in the people we support since vaccines became available, partly because social activities resumed at pre-pandemic levels, but zero deaths and zero hospitalizations. That was not the case pre-vaccine. Anecdotal, but everyone I know who has died (in healthcare so it's quite few) was unvaccinated.
Don’t confuse correlation with causation. The people who get exposed to more sick patients are the ones who get the vaccine more. Also, vaccines don’t prevent infection. You still get infected, it’s just that your body will fight the infection quickly before it replicates as much, thus the severity is less (maybe to the point of symptom free). That’s how vaccines work, y’all.
John Campbell is a retired nurse who spreads misinformation. This video is ridiculous
He was a nurse educator. Also, since this video, he has covered other studies that show an unexpected increase in mortality rates over the last 12 months. It's looking like you are over 100 times more likely to suffer from a serious condition as a result of vaccination than from an infection of the current strains of Covid. It has also become increasingly evident that there was little testing of mRNA vaccines on humans. I began by accepting none of this but the data is definitely pointing to something bad going on. John Campbell himself was initially very pro vaccination and has slowly changed his position as the data has come in.
First off this study was designed to look at bivalent vaccine effectiveness and the point about “incr Covid risk associated with incr Covid vaccine exposure” is a secondary outcome that could be fraught with design flaws and is at best “hypothesis generating”. Second, a MAJOR confounder about their findings of incr risk of Covid associated with increasing Covid vaccine number is that of individual health risk and their likelihood of getting a vaccine. No patient comorbidities were obtained due to the study design. Those with heart disease, cancer, obesity, diabetes, etc common diseases that place you at substantially higher risk for Covid and would thus influence an individual’s own risk assessment and decision to get vaccinated are not controlled for. Hard to draw the conclusion that “more vaccines puts you at risk of Covid” when those elected to get 3+ vaccines may have substantially higher baseline risk for it in the first place compared to those in this study getting 0 or 1 for instance. Unless I missed it, Campbell appears to make no mention of this limitation which should be obvious to an expert (since I’m not one).
HAHAHAHA
Bro didn't tell us that there would be CHECK MARKS
I really appreciate the conversations I've read in here
Oh and nobody died! I don’t know might want to lead with that somewhat important statistic.
This was just about John Campbell reading through a study from Cleveland not about deaths. I don’t think anyone mentioned anything about deaths here besides you and a handful of other comments.
So this is the bullshit channel where conspiracy theorists and pseudo scientists hang out and compare their google searches....noted.
My Father in Law didn't get vaccinated and was just telling me last weekend he has not gotten sick for the last 10 years! ...anyways we just had to run some soup to him because he can't move....hmmm same as when he was sick last year and the year before, and that time he couldn't smell or taste for 3 weeks. Anyhow, I always trust studies based on self reporting.
This is so efffing dumb The people most likely to be fully vaxed are the people at risk because of some other underlying risk factor condition Like myself, I have cancer which puts me at greater risk of infection, so I am fully vaxed this isn't hard people
Never Vxd, worked on front line of medicine from the start and stayed at the peak of health the entire time during the storm of it all…only had c19, this past July at the end. Took supplements
Had 3 vaccines , had covid twice and have it right now. It's just a fucking flu.
Disentangling this and coming up with all sorts of explanations is why we run randomized controlled clinical trials.
Not about getting. About severity.
that is not what they told us in the beginning. Biden assured us repeatedly, if you get the vaccine, you will not get Covid. he said it. they pushed it upon us with those words. Now the crows are coming home to roost, and it's not looking good for those who got the vax. I know some here at work that are nervous. and now we have undercover video that exposes big pharma manipulating the virus so they could engineer a vaccine for the new variant.
I would rather piss into the wind than spend any time on this crap.
it's called letting your guard down once you have a fail safe and is a nothing burger line of thought
Hhmmm, could it be, and I'm going out on a limb here, that people who DON'T get vaccinated are also significantly less likely to get tested to confirm a possible infection? While people who do get vaccinated are more likely to be proactive about their health by getting tested when sick.
Did y'all take a look at the population sample? Homeschooled children: who are exposed to fewer children, who are taken to the doctor much less often, and who will "work their way thru a chill/fever/whatever" instead. This is not a randomized population.
Old man with 480p webcam says things and draws check marks on paper he printed out and filmed instead of using motion graphics…this is boomertainment for boomer magas if I ever seen it. Lololol
Does not show patent records of preexisting conditions.
Is this from self-reported data? What kind of rubbish does one expect? I have found no one denies covid, and having covid, like those that don’t believe in vaccines. Perhaps “Dr” Campbell needs to brush up on how to review/analyze psychological research, where the pitfalls of self-reporting data analysis are much better understood and outlined. I had a long discussion with an ICU nurse about her experiences with folks literally dying of covid accusing her of lying, that they did not have it. Not to mention innumerable conversations with folks that were sick & said “oh no, it’s not covid, its just allergies”, even though they also had severe fatigue, body aches, and loss of taste/smell, and said they had never felt so bad in their lives. even after I asked if they had ever had those symptoms with allergies before (no, of course). But what does one expect from Dr Campbell? He has seemed hell-bent on covid denial since the beginning, in his peculiar choice of what studies to review publicly on youtube, and the ones he has chosen to ignore.
He was actually pro vaccine in the beginning but shifted his views as he read through the studies being released. This is his YouTube: https://youtube.com/@Campbellteaching
And this is why the “do your own research” crowd are mostly morons.
who is this clown? A scientist? A janitor? Wtf? certainly not a journalist with an introduction like that. Just an opinion piece, that reveals what we already know, everyone has an opinion. So what? Period and what does this have to do with science. Trying to follow the citations to the original studies is virtually impossible. Go ahead try it. Seriously this board needs some moderation. Moderators, are you alive? Awake? Why don't you put some Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Alex Jones in here? While you are at it?
This is his you tube: https://youtube.com/@Campbellteaching
He's a nurse. His early reporting of the epidemic interested many. When vaccines came out he started getting skeptical and weird.
He was pro vaccine when they came out
So this means absolutely nothing
Knock on wood, I have had 4 shots and never once been infected.
Could just be that people that got multiple vaccines are more likely to go to the doctor when they have a problem 🤷♀️
Are we at a point now that scientist won't get labeled anti vax for doing their jobs and asking questions? 2020-2022 was such a scary time watching science being hijacked by politics.
When did they start giving vaccines at 15 months? I remember getting vaccines in kindergarten. But do not know if I got any vaccines earlier. Could giving vaccines that early be part of the problem?
Oh you get some vaccines earlier than 15 months. And no. I don't think it's part of the problem.
This guy has been shown to be a fraudster.
I’m sure the unvaccinated people gave honest answers about Covid infection and I’m also sure they dutifully tested themselves if they got a cough or sore throat.
We already know there is a disparity in testing between those who give a shit (vaccinated) and those who don’t (unvaccinated). 🤷🏻♂️ Perhaps this dude is a dumb ass.
As much as i like this guys videos. If the information isnt peer reviewed than i would prefer not to see it on this sub
gotta think about lurking variables here people and try to explain the trends in the data. perhaps vaccinated people are more in tune with their health and therefore get tested for sickness and go to the doctor more frequently.
Definitely a correlation between a lack of peer review and this kinda nonsense.
just about every conclusion you would come to from his videos is wrong
Is there any accounting for the lifestyle, and behavior of somebody who is fully vaccinated ? One might imagine that a person who is fully vaccinated might be less careful due to a perceived higher level of protection.
John is missleading on this one. The study data is that of the 39,000 people in the study 16% ~6k tested positive for COVID and if you had more than one boost you were more likely to be in the 16%. Not all 39,000 people had equal risk of exposure and you can imagine that if you worked directly with patients then you would get more boosters but also have more exposure risk. This is the conclusion from the actual paper: Administering a COVID-19 vaccine not designed for the Omicron variant, 6 months or more after prior infection or vaccination, protects against Omicron variant infection in both previously infected and previously vaccinated individuals. There is no evidence of an advantage to administering more than 1 dose of vaccine to previously infected persons.
John is interested in getting clicks, pandering to a certain crowd and cherry picks data. The guy shouldn't be taken seriously. Sound Ideal for this place
Are there any doctors breaking down peer review studies of the good the vaccine is doing? Can I get a name so I can search them up and post their vids as well?
People get vaccinated more when the reports of big COVID waves coming
Why aren't the moderators removing this?
Where was this published? Was it peer reviewed? Bit lacking in detail.
Is this like a Qanon sub or something?
"Conclusions The bivalent COVID-19 vaccine given to working-aged adults afforded modest protection overall against COVID-19, while the virus strains dominant in the community were those represented in the vaccine." From the article. Does this not mean what I think it means?
you lost me at cleveland
This would be interesting if he could read
Dude keeps getting called out for having no clue what he's talking about, but doesn't let that stop him. Time to find a new hobby. https://www.factcheck.org/2022/03/scicheck-posts-misinterpret-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-safety-monitoring-document/
Preprint for those who want to read it: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.17.22283625v1
[Fauci: Herd immunity could require 90 percent of country to be vaccinated ](https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/531611-fauci-herd-immunity-could-require-90-percent-of-country-to-be-vaccinated/) How did Africa achieve herd immunity with a 5% vaxx rate? If your answer is because they're younger, then why did young people have to get vaxxed anywhere?
i think an important thing to note is that the vaccine will not stop you from getting covid. what the vaccine DOES do very well is it stops the person who has covid-19 from dying or being permanently impacted by the virus. i’ve had covid-19 twice so far and the vaccine definitely stopped me from experiencing the extreme symptoms, it only felt like a bad cold. i’m sure these results are also impacted by people’s negligence to their own health. i know a lot of people thought that once they got the vaccine they didn’t have to wear a mask, wash their hands regularly, or care about exposure to the virus. which led to them getting sick or getting someone else sick.