🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@vital876@mastodon.social Thanks, appreciate that. But yea it seems common sense really. If someone takes a vaccine and comes in a day later with a heart attack there is no conceivable way a doctor could say if that particular heart attack was caused by the vaccine or not.

Thats **why** we have VARS in fact. The doctor reports it anyway and then we look to see if the number of people getting vaccines that have heart attacks is greater than the number of people not getting vaccines who have heart attacks. From that we can determine if the vaccine causes heart attacks.

Obviously what you cant do (and hope to make any sense out of reality), is just go "oh that number looks big, I am now scared of vaccines". The number, without normalizing against background, means nothing.

@Acer I know of none on hand. but based on your wording in this post I'd suggest you at a minimum consider active vs passive voice :)

@meowski

You really dont understand the first thing about analyzing data if you think that somehow suggests in anyway that what I said was incorrect.

@djsumdog @se7en

@eris I'm sure if you follow meowski and friends you're bound to hear it sooner or later :)

Uh oh, the wack job conspiracy theorists are at it again... hint facts are called "disinformation" and scientists are now called "operatives" apparently... Can't make this stuff up.

@meowski

Of course anaphylaxis is the most common. Allergic reactions are more common than, say, heart attacks.

Well good to hear you think more highly of me than I do of you. Thanks.

@djsumdog @se7en

@meowski

Outside of immediate allergic reactions a doctor has absolutely no way to know if any disease is causal. So even if their motivations are as you claim it would still be impossible for that to be the case.

So yeaaa your way off on that part.

@djsumdog @se7en

@lupyuen ahh ok.. ill do alibaba sometimes but its kinda hit or miss on quality.

@icedquinn So nice isnt it? :)

@lupyuen never even heard of lazada before... might need to check them out.

@sky_captain

If a statement you make is meaningless (in this case because it is unnormalized) then likewise the conclusion you infer off of that statement is equally meaningless... So we are back at the fundamental point that you dont understand WHY your initial statement, even if true, is meaningless, nor what you would need to do with that data to make it meaningful.

Again more than happy to teach you about statistics and show you all that, but I suspect it might be a waste of my time. You clearly already came to your conclusions.

@djsumdog @se7en

@pixel I still have my minidiscs, though dont use them too much. But my stereo does take them... They were amazing.

@travis

Thats ok, easy mistake to make if your uneducated, I wouldnt expect you to know what most degrees means at the upper levels honestly. You are forgiven. Glad you recognized your mistake though.

@djsumdog @se7en @sky_captain

@sky_captain

Putting aside if that is true or not, im not sure you even realize what that would say if it were true. The statement alone, true or false, means nothing without doing what we call "normalization". I can explain what that means and why such a statement is meaningless, but im not entierly sure you care to listen honestly.

@djsumdog @se7en

@travis

Depends, associates degree would be "statistics"... Data Science is usually Masters or PhD level as is most of research science.

@djsumdog @se7en @sky_captain

@sky_captain

I'm literally a Data Scientist.. not only have I reviewed the data, I'm paid a hell of a lot of money to spend a lot of time looking at this data... So yea looking like you're the idiot here buddy.

@djsumdog @se7en

@djsumdog

I mean, I am literally a professional Data scientist who does this for a living... so yea, pretty sure I know where to get the data..

So first to prove you are completely clueless about the fact that two seperate set of data are kept, one for anyone with covid, and another for people who died of covid... here ya go...

this is the data for "all deaths involving covid". As in, as i described up-to-the-day data of anyone who died who happened to have covid diagnosis

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm

Similarly here is where you can find deaths **caused** by covid. Specifically the deaths where covid is the cause of death on the death certificate (notice how these numbers are also significantly lower than the others):

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/mortality-overview.htm

Nice try calling me an idiot at all, but you just showed you may be bombastic, but you are also clueless.

@se7en

@meowski

suprisingly you arent wrong there. VARES consists of two things: some reports that are actually caused by the vaccine, and other reports that were coincidental and not caused by the vaccine but just happened shortly after.

It is also true that only a small percentage of either category of events that occur make it into the DB at all.

So yes it very well could be 1% of legitimate adverse events make it in to VARES that doesnt in anyway change the fact that the vast majority of events reported in vares are merely coincidental.

@djsumdog @se7en