Here is a simple comparison of the severity of first and second jabs using only the Yellow Card Reports. It is not definitive but general guidance.
Over the last five weeks or so, the rate of death from the second jab is 2.90 times that from the first jab. The adverse reactions are similar at 2.88 times.
One thing to bear in mind, though, is that the second jabs will be given to people a few years older than the first jab. However, if one takes the relative severity from the beginning of April, it is about 2 times. A longer period tends to rule out age effects as the spacing between jabs has less influence.
The bottom line is that one is 2-3 times more likely to suffer adverse reactions or death from the second jab than from the first jab.
Not much use without separating out by vaccine type.
Zoe (and other global data along with yellow card) shows AZ side effects are mostly after dose 1. Pfizer mostly after dose 2.
Moderna looks to be a split.
It is always useful to look at the wood before looking at the trees. If I get time, I will prepare a comparison.
The advantage of lumping all the jabs together is that it smooths out different usage. In the attached charts, I separate out AstraZeneca and Pfizer. (The new forum format only allows one attachment.
AstraZeneca has been largely stopped as a 1st dose for several weeks. Using the recent slope as a comparison is meaningless, so ignore the slopes quoted.
On the AstraZeneca chart, it seems clear to me that the death rate is higher for the 2nd jab. With the Pfizer, this is also the case - more so recently than previously. It is similar for adverse reactions. Have I misread this somehow?
Why am I making this comparison? Sources (Professor Sukharit Bhakdi for one) say that the gradual manufacture and accumulation of toxic spike protein will increase mortality. If spotting a trend between 1st and 2nd doses indicates this, then it would be a clear warning against boosters.
Why do you always put blind faith in the Yellow Card reports? What methods are used to ensure a vaccine is necessarily the cause of some event?
Because these system have been used for more than 30 years in some countries and their expressed purpose is as a key part of the vaccine safety system. The main problem with these vaccines adverse response reporting systems is that they are so bad at catching actual events, especially long term adverse response events. The under reporting rate could be as high as 90%.
As for the spurious no causality / correlational argument against them the criteria used is no different than in standard clinical differential diagnostics. If you go to a doctor they dont ask you about any out of the ordinary events that happen a year ago. They ask did anything unusual happen in the last few days / weeks.
No different with Yellow Card. If someone just got a very invasive medical procedure like a vaccination and a few days / weeks later there is adverse response there is a high probability of a causal relationship. Especially as the large majority of adverse responses recorded are just like the ones recorded during clinical trials for vaccines.
There is not enough breakdown in the Yellow Card system of individual cases histories like in VAERS but I am sure it follows the same pattern. Most younger people have typical younger people adverse responses, most older people have typical older people ones. Its when a pattern of unexpected adverse responses start showing up that these reporting systems prove their worth. As they have on several occasions in the past.
The problem with the Yellow Card numbers for the SARs CoV 2 vaccines is not the type of adverse responses but the unprecedented high rate of events. At least for mass vaccines used on the general population. The kind of adverse responses rates we are seeing for SARs 2 vaccines are at levels that would get a Phase II trial for a vaccine candidate in the past canceled at an early stage. They are that high.
Posted by: @jmc
@ewloe Because these system have been used for more than 30 years in some countries and their expressed purpose is as a key part of the vaccine safety system.
The trouble is that they are vulnerable to pollution by errors as well as organised anti-vaxx activity or plain old ignorance and exaggeration.
Perhaps I'm paranoid, but I tend to trust research by for example Oxford Univerisity, as introduced in this bbc article.
The research suggests that for every 10m people vaccinated with AstraZeneca, 107 will be hospitalised or die due to vaccine side effects like Thrombocytopenia, but if were they not vaccinated 934 of the 10m would develop a similar condition via natural infection.
There is plenty of scope there for those who prefer hearsay and exaggeration to have a go at the BBC and Oxford University. Similar results were found for Pfizer. So damned if you do and damned if you do not but much more chance of being damned if you do not vaccinate. It is what it is.
Posted by: @jmc
@ewloe Because these system have been used for more than 30 years in some countries and their expressed purpose is as a key part of the vaccine safety system.
The trouble is that they are vulnerable to pollution by errors as well as organised anti-vaxx activity or plain old ignorance and exaggeration.
Perhaps I'm paranoid, but I tend to trust research by for example Oxford Univerisity, as introduced in this bbc article.
The research suggests that for every 10m people vaccinated with AstraZeneca, 107 will be hospitalised or die due to vaccine side effects like Thrombocytopenia, but if were they not vaccinated 934 of the 10m would develop a similar condition via natural infection.
There is plenty of scope there for those who prefer hearsay and exaggeration to have a go at the BBC and Oxford University. Similar results were found for Pfizer. So damned if you do and damned if you do not but much more chance of being damned if you do not vaccinate. It is what it is.
One of the few rational posts.
Why do you always put blind faith in the Yellow Card reports? What methods are used to ensure a vaccine is necessarily the cause of some event?
Why is there a Yellow Card Report system? And why would anyone ignore its results?
Why do you always put blind faith in the Yellow Card reports? What methods are used to ensure a vaccine is necessarily the cause of some event?
Same guff, different name. I guess St Piots Cafe and siblings etc etc have retired or gone on vacation so you moved East. Any further and you'll be having to choose an English pseudonym.
Why do you always put blind faith in the Yellow Card reports? What methods are used to ensure a vaccine is necessarily the cause of some event?
Same guff, different name. I guess St Piots Cafe and siblings etc etc have retired or gone on vacation so you moved East. Any further and you'll be having to choose an English pseudonym.
It is no concern of mine since Chrome remembers the name and password, but sometimes forgets giving me the problem of a lost account.
