COVID, Vaccinations and Risk

Vaccine doses received Pfizer, Moderna and JJ). Source Virginia Department of Health.

by James A. Bacon

A new feature of the Virginia Department of Health’s COVID-19 dashboard compares the rate of infections, hospitalizations and deaths among vaccinated and unvaccinated people. We’ll get to that in just a moment. By way of preface, it’s worth noting that every Virginian who wants the vaccine has it.

The graph above shows the number of vaccines given since December 1. Shots given declined to almost zero in July and early August. As the Delta variant created a new surge in infections, a few hold-outs began getting the jab. At this point in time, about 4.9 million Virginians — about 57% of the population — are described as “fully” vaccinated. That number is not likely to change much, although the classification of “fully” vaccinated could change as vaccinations lose their potency and we are urged to get boosters.

Maybe the numbers that follow will jar some of the hitherto unwilling into thinking differently about the risks they face. The next chart shows the differences in the COVID infection rates broken down by vaccination status: fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated, and unvaccinated.

Unvaccinated people developed COVID-19 at 13 times the rate of fully vaccinated people and 2.6 times the rate of the partially vaccinated.

I have questioned public health policy that refuses to acknowledge that there are two meaningful categories of unvaccinated people: those who have acquired natural resistance from a past infection and those who have not. However, I would say this: If you fall into the latter category — if you have neither a vaccination nor naturally acquired immunity — you are likely at far greater relative risk than shown above.

A third graph shows the relative risk for hospitalization.

The gap closely tracks that for infections.

This fourth graph shows the gap for deaths:

Whoah! While the risk of death is low compared to infections and hospitalizations, unvaccinated Virginians are at 18.4 times greater risk of dying than the fully vaccinated.

Getting vaccinated is no ironclad guarantee that you won’t get COVID-19, wind up in the hospital and die. Conversely, staying unvaccinated is no guarantee that you will end up a statistic. There aren’t any 100% guarantees in epidemiology. But the odds sure are in your favor if you get the jab.

I look at it like this: We’re all stuck in the “The Deer Hunter” scene when the North Vietnamese compel the Christopher Walken character to play Russian roulette. We didn’t ask to be put in this situation, but we’ve got to live )or die) with the potentially lethal consequences. If I’m forced to play the game, I’d rather have one bullet in the chamber than five.

Still, I get frustrated with limits to the data. There are other major risk factors that could help guide our personal risk calculus. I hear repeatedly that having a universal-donor blood type, O-, makes you significantly at lower risk. I’ve heard that having Vitamin D deficiencies puts you at significantly higher risk. And I think it’s universally acknowledged that obesity is a huge risk factor, especially for hospitalization and death.

That’s where the civil libertarian in me comes into play. If you’ve got naturally acquired immunity, and an O- blood type, plenty of Vitamin D in your system, and you’re not obese, why shouldn’t you be allowed to make a decision based on your own risk profile?

Meanwhile, COVID guru Anthony Fauci says that you can be vaccinated but be just as likely as an unvaccinated person to be an asymptomatic carrier. That explodes the justification for mandating vaccines in order to protect others from the virus. There may be a you’re-not-protecting-yourself-you’re-protecting-others logic for mandating mask wearing, on the grounds that masks do limit the expulsion of the virus from your nose and mouth, but it does not apply to vaccinations.

The science is evolving as we learn more about the virus. Yet the virus itself mutates, potentially scrambling everything we thought to be true about older strains.

Speaking for myself at this particular moment, I’m guided by these odds, as described by the VDH:

As of 8/21/2021, 4,767,990 Virginians have been fully vaccinated against COVID-19. Of these people, 0.2% have developed COVID-19, 0.009% have been hospitalized, and 0.0017% have died.

Share this article


(comments below)


(comments below)


43 responses to “COVID, Vaccinations and Risk”

  1. LarrytheG Avatar

    re: ” If you’ve got naturally acquired immunity, and an O- blood type, plenty of Vitamin D in your system, and you’re not obese, why shouldn’t you be allowed to make your own decision about vaccination based on your own risk profile?”

    Does this sound a little bit like, “since I’ve never had an accident much less while drunk and I can hold my liquor better than most, why should I be subject to not only a .8 alcohol level but still force to have an alcohol test to boot?

    Seems like, there are two parts to the issue. The first is your own risk, but the second is the risk you also could impose on others if you are not vaccinated, get infected then infect others.

    That’s the entire public health issue. It’s not just our individual risk.

  2. walter smith Avatar
    walter smith

    I remain unconvinced. I’d like to see numbers, not percentages. And I don’t trust how they calculate the data. This is like climate science – change an assumption and you can change the results 180 degrees. I read somewhere that “fully vaccinated” was being defined as 14 days AFTER the second dose. If true, that sure is convenient…and a good way to sweep any VAERS deaths under the rug. Also, this is shoveling the sidewalk while the blizzard is ongoing. The “vaccinated” numbers really need to be sorted based on how long ago they have been vaxed. Are the ones dying vaxed 6 months ago while the survivors were vaxed only 2 months ago? How would these numbers look after a full year? Are the unvaxed dead ones who were so obese or co-morbid they were going to die anyway? Did they already have a medical condition that they couldn’t get vaxed? If the vax is so effective, why boosters? Will the vaxed be “hooked” on a never-ending need for boosters? Do we know that this manipulation of mRNA spike protein repeatedly doesn’t harm natural immunity? I have seen some reports that if you have natural immunity, the vax hurts or destroys the full, robust response. We don’t know (and I admit it, unlike all the “experts” who I haven’t seen get anything right so far).
    I really don’t get the urgency to break the law and vax people not at risk. I don’t get the suppression of ivermectin and HCQ (other than you have to deny them to do the EUA). What is the real death rate from Covid? (As opposed to with or precipitated by?) How many who have died are fat? For public health reasons for Larry, we need to put everyone on a starvation diet…cuz the government cares and knows better, right Larry? Welcome to North Korea or Communist China.
    And on to my favorite – the vaccine that is being administered is still EUA. It violates federal law. Since you all pay no attention to the US Code, here is the Code of Federal Regulations – Jim Ryan clerked at the Supreme Court. Whitt Clement is a lawyer and has the full plethora of associates at Hunton Andrews & Kurth to pull up the US Code and the CFR. THEY KNOW THEY ARE BREAKING THE LAW. The doctors at UVA Health KNOW THEY ARE VIOLATING MEDICAL ETHICS, THEIR OWN HEALTH SYSTEM’S POLICIES, and the law. THE VDH knows the mandate violates the law, the health system’s policies, AND ITS OWB CODE OF CONDUCT. ( I know they know this because I have told them…repeatedly!) Excuse me for being so anal, but I have a problem with intentional breaking of the law…
    So I remain unconvinced given the incomplete data and the great still unknown. It doesn’t help that I think the people are liars and that they are breaking the law and pretending they aren’t.
    So, I continue to think if you are young, and if you are not 65 or over, and if you don’t have the co-morbidities that we know are bad with Covid, live your life. Don’t get fat. Get sunlight. Wash your hands. Have the habits that build a healthy immune system. (Did you know the lockdowns weakened immune systems for lack of sunlight? Made people fatter? Delayed treatments caused a lot of deaths? That locking down with a sick person in the house was more likely to make you sick? That the virus particles are 20 times smaller than the mask openings? Trust the experts!)
    So, until real, non-manipulated science proves to my satisfaction that it is better, I will remain of the belief that for those not at risk, carry on your life. The virus will do what it does, if (when) it gets you, practice good habits, get well and know you now have natural immunity. But, for those at risk, and for those who CHOOSE to, get the shot…(and I still think that is like being one of the Bleeding Edge Technology gotta have it buyers.)

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      I do agree – there does indeed seem to be a correlation between climate skeptics and COVID skeptics…same basic issue – distrust of science and government.

      1. walter smith Avatar
        walter smith

        Because it isn’t science?
        For you, SCIENCE! is a religion.
        For me it is a process of skepticism, requiring replication so that what is being asserted becomes undeniable. (And even then we discover more and have to amend our understanding)
        So, sorry, Larry – and I think this comes to a worldview issue – I think it is hubris for our experts to think they can control the climate (they can’t) or a virus (they can’t).

        I note no substantive comments to my questions or the laws being broken…

        Maybe I should draft The Leftists Creed

        I believe in SCIENCE and the primordial ooze from which it came.
        I believe in total control by the experts and the sacrament of abortion, that sex is interchangeable, that a trans man is a woman capable of getting pregnant, that I have no right to disagree with medical treatment of my body from the experts, except for the Holy Sacrament of killing an unborn clump of cells, as our great Matriarch Margaret Sanger required (particularly in black neighborhoods)…

        I’ll have to work on that one…

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          Walter, are you skeptical of Cancer Science, Paleontology, Genetics? Plate tectonics?

          I see most all science in similar terms. I don’t see some science as “false” or not trustable.

          I think the paleontologists have some things mostly right and other things are still being figured out but I trust the process by which they do it.

          It’s even possible one guy can do a study and upend settled science… but again, I trust the process.

          It’s not a religion. It’s a pragmatic approach to learning…. which is actually the opposite of religion.

          1. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Not being mean then Larry. Your lack of skepticism and demanding proof makes you a poor scientist.
            What I observe from you is parroting of whatever the Dems believe advances their narrative.
            Meanwhile, still nobody answering my questions (but here is a difference – Jim Bacon pointed to data and interpretations – I pointed to questions around that data – that is the scientific process) or the violations of law.
            Maybe one day people will wrap their heads around my problem is the mandate for something that is likely not needed by 98% of the populace AND we don’t fully understand. The mRNA is experimental. We don’t know its full effects. Given the uncertainty, it is immoral, a crime against humanity, to force people to be lab rats.
            Even if the science eventually shows all is OK with the vaccine, and if it is LEGALLY required, then there should still be medical and religious exemptions.
            Really not hard to understand my position – get the damn shot if you want, but our government “servants” need to be honest – they have not.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar

            Nothing to do with politics at all Walter.

            Was at the pharmacy today to get a prescription and they asked if I wanted a flu shot and I said yes without once wondering about it. I trust vaccines, I always have and I’ve always got the shots before COVID ever started.

            And I don’t want to give others my cold flu, so I stay away or cover up when I am infected. It’s simple stuff.

            It has always been for decades.

          3. Stephen Haner Avatar
            Stephen Haner

            Larry’s a partisan hack and ignorant of science. The data behind the COVID recommendations is based on experiment, including randomized controlled trials, done all over the world and subjected to withering peer review (hence the issues that remain unresolved.) The underlying science is centuries old (vaccination etc.) The outcomes on the vaccines to date are hard numbers, hard numbers. As I wrote in two pieces earlier this week, the hard numbers on the climate contradict the Climate Armageddon Narrative, and nobody has yet figured out randomized control trials on rain and wind and any other model projections. They are not hard science.

          4. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            See? Mr. Haner knows how to science.
            And I agree with him on the climate science. Total garbage, easily manipulated, and horribly corrupted by federal and think tank/NGO money

          5. LarrytheG Avatar

            As far as I know, ya’ll have zero background in science, much less this particular science and yet, ya’ll are looking at data that science collected and you’re telling the scientists that collected it that they are wrong, incompetent, lying… not one or two but the entire field.

            that’s not good.

          6. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            One must be a scientist to evaluate a story? Can a farmer study agronomics? Only lawyers may comment on law? Diplomats on international policies?
            If Haner or I make scientific or legal points, then rebut the points, rather than saying we aren’t qualified.
            And for some reason with respect to COVID, which seems to suspend true, rational reason, besides my suspicion over cooking the books, I think the time period of observation is too small to make the broad conclusions our governmental experts and overlords have proclaimed. That is hardly an unscientific position. These results are more like a snap balance sheet and not a true statement of operations. I’d like a longer view with clean data.

          7. LarrytheG Avatar

            Walter, science, is not a “story” , nor a belief nor an opinion.

            And yes, anyone can comment on anything, but someone who has never academically studied science or worked in the field is no more knowledgeable about science than you, or I are about something like dentistry or bridge design or any other field that you and I have no academic training in nor work experience.

            There seems to be an attitude that “smart people” can go read about science, like climate science or vaccines and, by reading and “reasoning”, figure out what took scientists in the field years of academic schooling and work to understand.

            In other words, all that academic schooling and years/decades of working in the field was not needed.

            Any “smart person” can read a few scientific study papers and figure it out and determine the science is wrong.

            It’s bonkers IMHO.

          8. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            And your misplaced total trust is bonkers IMHO. Particularly in people who have lied.
            Fool me once, shame on you.
            Fool me twice…
            You’re not old enough to remember The Who (I think) -We Won’t Be Fooled Again?

          9. LarrytheG Avatar

            I don’t have total trust at all. It’s the opposite. But no, I don’t see science as “lying”. There might be an individual study or even an individual scientist who has said something, but when someone is saying an entire field of science is lying – and conspiring to perpetuate a lie, and those accusations are coming from folks who have no academic schooling in science and no actual experience in the field , it’s bonkers in my view.

            There are lies. There are media who can’t report the science and/or mislead people. There are scientists that lie and are corrupt. All of this, yes, but to say that means all scientists in a field or a field of science is lying is in my mind – just bonkers.

            I don’t think Climate scientists or epidemiologists “lie” anymore or less than I think geneticists and paleontologists “lie” and I certainly don’t think those who have no background or training in those fields even knows or understands the field enough to basically say – all of them are lying or are incorrect, etc…

          10. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Ok, Larry. Maybe most of the scientists aren’t lying. Maybe…
            But do you know how you disprove a theory of science? By asking hard questions! I did. These are potential weaknesses in the studies. Sorry, you don’t deem my credentials sufficient…although as a lawyer you are faced with all sorts of things and have to ask questions with the potential to “prove” your case in Court…
            But some, many, most(?) scientists are lying. Dr. St. Fau(x)ci, the Mendacious Midget is the worst. He knew masks don’t work. He was telling Obama acolytes that in January…of 2020! He flips as flops as a 40 year survivor of the Swamp must. He has been captured by Big Pharma, and he lied about gain of function. Why would we manipulate viruses to make them more deadly? I find it hard to find any benevolent purpose for that.

          11. LarrytheG Avatar

            Walter. Science has a process. I trust the process when it is practiced.

            Yes there ARE weaknesses in individual studies but over time with multiple scientists doing multiple studies, they start to develop more understanding and they build on that.

            There are no Obama acolytes in science.

            COVID is a new disease that science is still trying to understand. There are conflicting studies that will take time to find what’s true and what is not. That does not mean science fails – it’s the way that science actually works, but it’s not giving us the certainty that we’ve come to expect from prior science.

            Science differed on the masks initially and still does not have them completely calibrated but MOST science, dozens, hundreds of studies do indicate SOME efficacy, in part, depending on the type of mask.

            Fauci and others were not wrong. They were not lying. They provided what they thought they knew at that time, pending more studies.

            You guys that are all spun up on lies and conspiracies…’s nuts.

            Some cynicism is always warranted and some individual scientists have been caught lying and even some studies – corrupt – but over the longer run – the vast majority of scientists and science are what takes us forward on everything that affects us from Cancer to genetics to just about everything we touch and encounter in our daily lives.

            It’s bad enough to distrust science, but to latch on to “smart” people who have no academic training or actually work in the field – to rely on them for advice and truth is just bonkers.

          12. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            So you have seen the Fauci emails where he says masks don’t work? Where are your hundreds of studies on masks working? Have you seen all the ones that show they don’t work? That the shields don’t work? That the lockdowns were counterproductive? Do you know that the LEED certified energy efficient (cuz CLIMATE and SCIENCE is gooder!) increase the likelihood of COVID transmission because they are so airtight? Now they have to retro engineer ventilation, causing more energy use…
            Do you check ANY news besides what you are fed by the mainstream and what our Silicon Valley overlords permit?
            How come Alex Berenson got banned by Twitter for a 5th COVID misinformation strike recently occurred when his first four strikes have now been proved true?
            Please waste someone else’s time with your religion. I’ll stick with mine, at least as long as our betters will permit it.

          13. LarrytheG Avatar

            Fauci (and others) gave their assessments at the time they knew what was known.

            As time has gone by, more studies have been done and more learned and assessments changed. That’s the way science works.

            The masks, social distancing and other measures were mitigation that would allow us to remain open and not lock down.

            The anti folks basically reject science, reject the idea of mitigation and want no lockdowns – a recipe for disaster IMHO.

            LEED was never designed with COVID in mind per se but we do know how to filter air and use UV in other settings like hospitals and labs.

            None of this is lying or intent to deceive , it’s the normal process of learning as we go along and making adjustments to adapt.

            An example is airbags in cars. People were being killed by some 1st generation bags. That did not mean science was lying or deceiving. We still did not fully understand and once we did, we improved and adapted.

            It’s not political. It’s a process.

          14. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Put up your studies Larry. They do not exist.

          15. LarrytheG Avatar

            which ones, on masking?

          16. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Masking. Shields. Social distancing. Lockdowns.

          17. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Anthropomorphic climate change exists. Human activity effects the climate. Google “habitation fog”. The climate in large cities differes from the rural surroundings. The only question is scale.

          18. Matt Adams Avatar

            The term is anthropogenic, I find it hard to take someone serious on a topic, when they can’t even use the right terms.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Have you received the vaccine? If not, just keep doing what you’re doing, and the answer will come to you.

      Culling the herd works too.

      1. walter smith Avatar
        walter smith

        The benevolent face of the Left… They love people!
        My vax status in none of your business, nor is mine in yours. Maybe I have it. Maybe I don’t. Maybe I can’t. Maybe I have a religious exemption. My point has been the mandates are illegal. They are, despite our wizard of smart AG Kurtis Blow Herring saying so. And besides illegal, they are wrong on a medical ethics basis. This was the norm before COVID.
        Now that the Texas heartbeat bill was not enjoined by the Supreme Court, a lot of Leftists are back to my body my choice. Finally, as to the science, it is not known. The period of observation has not been long enough for an experimental product. So if I were a prescribing doc and I was faced with a young person under 30, it would take an incredible amount of bad risk factors to recommend the COVID vax. And I’m right. Deal with it rather than snark wishing death…

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          except mandates are not illegal. That’s the simple truth.

          And nope, before COVID, for some things you had to have proof of vaccination.

          There is nothing “leftist” about vaccines for 50-100 years or more. It was not political.

          You do have a right to risk infection, but others have a right to restrict you from putting them at risk by your choices and behaviors.

          This is not political or at least it used to not be – both liberals and conservatives used to agree on things like smoking in public places or a “right” to drive drunk, smoking at the gas pumps, etc.

          1. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            You are a broken clock without being right twice a day.
            How much are you paid to repeat The Narrative?
            Mandating an EUA product is illegal. US Code and CFR. Mandating treatment violates medical ethics. Every single system. That’s is why the legislatively adopted vaccine mandates in the States ALL have medical and religious exemptions. The CDC is a federal agency. It is not the legislature. Following the CDC violates separation of powers when enforced. Using the private employer dodge to carry out illegality is both immoral and unconstitutional.
            This has nothing to do with the general historic use of vaccines. The experimental therapy is not a vaccine. Now please go trust your experts and accept that I disagree and demand proof.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar

            From a common-sense perspective, the COVID vaccines have been given to far more people than they would have in a longer term trial protocol. And they have performed as good or better in efficacy and adverse reactions. They are clearly as safe and effective as other vaccines.

            The purpose of the protocols is to insure a vaccine is safe and effective, and they are, and “official” approval is imminent.

            Not much to hang your hat on at this point. The vaccines are clearly safe and effective.

            I give you credit for one thing for sure – to this point, you are one of the very few here that can disagree and debate without hurling Ad Hominems.

            For that I congratulate and thank you and at this point, maybe agree to disagree ?

          3. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            The vaccines are “clearly safe and effective.”
            Says who? What is your definition of “safe?”
            This doesn’t say “safe” to me – and even worse when we know VAERS does not capture all the incidents. 30 years of historic safety practiced and abandoned…for Covid?

            “Effective?” I will have to go check the tapes. I don’t seem to recall needing a third shot or a booster… I thought we would be FREE AT LAST! Am I mistaken? Didn’t the wizards of smaty say so? Didn’t SlowJoe read off the TelePromTer that he would deliver us, like Moses, by July 4?

            The COVID vaxes are far less safe than 30 years of prior vax history…cumulatively!
            Effective? Remains to be seen. And we don’t know if there are long term effects like antibody dependent enhancement or other things.
            How come the inventor of the mRNA concept is advocating against mandatory Covid vaxing until more is known? He is an idiot? He used to be a wizard of smart… How come 2 people on the FDA vaccine board just resigned (or whatever branch of our far too big government it was from)? It is politics and it is corrupting pure rational research.

          4. LarrytheG Avatar

            safe and effective based on millions/billions of shots given around the world and dramatic reductions in death and few reports of adverse reactions that we would certainly hear about in the media if it was an issue.

            On the FDA resignations. Yes, political pressure to approve. I agree. And I
            hope Biden realizes the damage it has done. It looks like the resulting push-back has changed the rollout of the boosters, despite the politics.

            We’ll need boosters but it depends on which vaccine as to when.

            Again, the issue of the need for boosters has come from the science.

            It’s not one study, one guys off the wall opinion. It’s based on data being collected – part of the way that science does work.

            You seem to be expecting much more precision and certainty. It’s not there but the alternative of rejecting science all together seems like frying pan into the fire stuff to me.

            I wish the science was better and faster but it’s simply not. It is what it is.

          5. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Larry – you did not address the VAERS data. In 8 months, let’s give extra credit 9 months of Covid vax, more VAERS incidents than in 31 years of all other vaxes…cumulatively! Why drop the standards? Even if billions of shots and a small percentage, why did we use to have higher standards? Other than politics, can you explain the rush? And when the CDC knows VAERS is under-reported by a large factor? Also, there are at least two biases I can think of – confirmation bias at the medical systems, fear of loss of jobs. With better data, I bet I could find more. Which leads back to why are you mandating it for people who don’t need it? You are ok putting them at risk to protect you?
            Since we know natural immunity is more robust, you’re OK with getting them vaxed? Why isn’t this the choice of the patient? And don’t give me they have been legal argument – they get passed into legality when they are KNOWN to be safe and effective. And even then, there are medical and religious exemptions. They don’t KNOW. They suspect (confirmation bias). And their confirmation bias is being shown. But you do you and blindly trust “the experts” who are breaking the law and medical ethics and don’t bother asking “Cui bono?”

          6. LarrytheG Avatar

            re: ” more VAERS incidents than in 31 years of all other vaxes…cumulatively!”

            I’ve heard this but have not seen proof of the claim.

            the VAERS data ia ALL reported adverse events that may or may not be directly attributable to the COVID vaccine.

            Why don’t you provide a link to a credible site that backs up the claim that there are more adverse reactions to Covid vaccines that all others?

            Here’s what I see:

            I believe what the CDC is saying here.

            I need to see something from another credible source that disputes it.

            Again, I do not “blindly” trust “the experts” but I sure as hell don’t have much trust in people with no credentials at all who are just pulling stuff out their backsides or worse, misrepresenting information.

          7. LarrytheG Avatar

            Yep. He is not actually providing links to where he got the data from.

            he says this: ” All charts and tables below reflect the data release on 9/3/2021 from the VAERS website, which includes U.S. and foreign data, and is updated through: 8/27/2021″ but he is not providing a link to that data.

            The CDC says this:

            ” VAERS Limitations
            VAERS reports alone generally cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness. Some reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, or unverifiable. VAERS reports often lack contextual information, such as total vaccinations given or information on unvaccinated groups for comparison. Most reports to VAERS are voluntary, which means they may be subject to biases. Data from VAERS reports should always be interpreted with these limitations in mind.”

            So he says things like:

            ” *Note that the total number of deaths associated with the COVID-19 vaccines is greater than the number of deaths associated with all other vaccines combined since the year 1990.”

            which is simply not true.

            ” Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 369 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through August 30, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 7,218 reports of death (0.0020%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause. Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines. However, recent reports indicate a plausible causal relationship between the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS, a rare and serious adverse event—blood clots with low platelets—which has caused deaths pdf icon[1.4 MB, 40 pages].”

            Now who do I believe? The CDC.

            This guy is clearly misrepresenting the data. He does not even identify himself.

          8. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            The usual Larry now I don’t trust the source dodge.
            So, all the deaths according to the CDC we can question? Do you really think they have it straight as to died from, died with, or died precipitated by?
            Do you trust the case count, given that the CDC has ordered new protocols for testing by 1/1/22 because the current PCR test cannot distinguish between Covid and flu? How about…how come the CDC quit tracking “breakthrough” cases as of May 1?
            Would you trust this expert Larry? The inventor of mRNA vaccine technology?
            He lives in Madison. You could get on 17 to 29 and take a left on 230 and talk to him yourself.

          9. LarrytheG Avatar

            I do trust the CDC and VAERS including their cautions about the meaning and use of the data far more than I do any individual who is unidentified and just flat ignores what the CDC/VAERs cautions- and just flat goes on and misrepresents the data anyhow and claims it’s from the CDC!

            The “what abouts” are equally problematical in my mind especially when they’re probably not any more true than this guys disingenuous claims on his website.

            This is about purposely lying and misrepresenting information. Why trust any of it at all?

            The CDC and VAEP do not lie.

            These other guys cited, it seems to be their primary thing.

            have you seen this about the breakthrough cases:


            What we have IMHO is purposeful efforts to misrepresent data – disinformation that contradicts what the CDC/FDA and others are actually doing and people dumb enough to believe it and then, in turn, spread it themselves.

            The CDC has been forced to try to address the lies and disinformation:

            Myths and Facts about COVID-19 Vaccines


            and the hell of it is that even folks who got the shots – who trusted the CDC when they said the shots were safe , some of them are also supporting the lies and myths. Really hypocritical

          10. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Larry – unlike you, I read the sites you cite.
            Here is an interesting tidbit…
            State health departments voluntarily report vaccine breakthrough cases to CDC. As of May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from publicly reporting the passive surveillance of all vaccine breakthrough cases on the website to focus on hospitalized or fatal vaccine breakthrough cases due to any cause. This shift helped maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health importance. Some health departments continue to report all vaccine breakthrough cases to the national database and continue to submit specimens to CDC for sequencing. Previous data on all vaccine breakthrough cases reported to CDC from January–April 2021 are available.
            So then they report only on hospitalized or dead breakthrough cases. (Because if they reported all it would show waning effectiveness?)
            Then this language follows –
            COVID-19 vaccines are effective
            To date, no unexpected patterns have been identified in the case demographics or vaccine characteristics among people with reported vaccine breakthrough infections.
            COVID-19 vaccines are effective. CDC recommends that everyone 12 years of age and older get a COVID-19 vaccine as soon as they can.
            For those who are fully vaccinated and get infected (ie, “breakthrough infections”), there is a risk of transmission to others.
            That is why, if you are vaccinated or unvaccinated and live in an area with substantial or high transmission of COVID-19, you will be better protected if you wear a mask when you are in indoor public places, even if you are fully vaccinated.
            People who are immunocompromised may not be protected even if fully vaccinated and may be more likely to have a breakthrough infection. They should continue to take all precautions recommended for unvaccinated people, until advised otherwise by their healthcare provider.
            This unsubstantiated BS. A bald assertion. And Covid “breakthroughs” WERE NOT EXPECTED. They are lying.

            As to your second piece of uncritically accepted propaganda, I don’t recall pointing out any of those things. Most are ridiculous. But here is the lie that matters most –
            Is it safe for me to get a COVID-19 vaccine if I would like to have a baby one day?
            illustration of person thinking about having a baby
            Yes. COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for everyone 12 years of age or older, including people who are trying to get pregnant now or might become pregnant in the future, as well as their partners.

            Currently no evidence shows that any vaccines, including COVID-19 vaccines, cause fertility problems (problems trying to get pregnant) in women or men. Learn more about COVID-19 vaccines and people who would like to have a baby.

            Do you see the weasel word, Larry? “Currently”
            How come post-marketing studies have been ordered on pregnancy by potential birthing people? (Otherwise known as women). Read the so-called approval letter.

            Seriously, you are lucky to be alive believing anything you are told.

            Why does this website exist? It is dated August 30. Why would CDC be asking for this data if they KNOW it is currently safe for those preggers birthing people?

            I am done wasting my time with you on this issue. There is none so blind as he who will not see.
            Your refusal to ask critical questions and assert your religious belief in the bureaucrats of CDC reminds me of your refusal to recognize that an intact 2 parent family is the best structure for society. Moynihan knew it before the Great Society and called his shot.

          11. LarrytheG Avatar

            re: ” This unsubstantiated BS. A bald assertion. And Covid “breakthroughs” WERE NOT EXPECTED. They are lying.”

            How do you possibly actually know this? Isn’t this just more conspiratorial what-about-ism?

            It makes no sense. Billions of people have gotten the vaccine and survived and the number of those who actually died from the vaccine is not even definitively known, but even if one accepts that all on VAEPers did , it amounts to something like .0017%.

            re: lucky to be alive –

            Unfortunately, people actually are dying by believing the misinformation and refusing the vaccine.

            People who are doing this share responsibility for those deaths and should be ashamed.


            It makes no sense at all other than just plain ignorance and loony tune thinking.

        2. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          Don’t play the lottery. It’s only a tax on your kind.

  3. I am fully vaccinated.

    Based on data I have found which I [sort of] trust, I am personally about 100 times more likely to die in a motorcycle crash than from Covid-19.

    Dying of Covid-19 is near the bottom of the list of things I worry about – right down there with being struck by lightning or being killed by a tsunami.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Wear your helmet, vary your speed, and don’t play golf in a thunderstorm, stay in the moutains. There, now you can worry about Covid again.

  4. Fred Costello Avatar
    Fred Costello

    The distrust is not in the science but in the scientists and those who draw conclusions from what the scientists say. So believing the scientists is a sort of religion.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Religion? People tell me that someday I’ll find God. I strongly doubt this. I cannot find my car keys and the empirical evidence they exist is in the garage.

      At this time, the scientists are stating their conclusions based on the empirical evidence found in the drawers in the morgue. It’s one thing to believe that for which there is evidence, another thing to believe that for which there is none, and still another to believe that for which all evidence indicates just the opposite.

Leave a Reply