Covid Vaccine

[oneforthebus]

You do not seem to understand that the expert who wrote the piece based his/her judgement on "evaluation" and then did not do that. They just -- like you -- rejected the study whole cloth because the unvaccinated kids needs less doctors visits.

Do you not understand that the writer used the conclusion of the study : that unvaccinated kids are healthier, in his poorly constructed circular argument to discredit the study?

You are being wilfully blind, open your mind

You’re willfully ignoring all of the flaws in the methodology. You also don’t seem to understand the peer review process and the fact that it’s not my or this guy’s personal opinion…there are factual reasons many “studies” are rejected by the process and not published. There are numerous other articles explaining why this study is invalid. Not going to waste my time posting all of them.

 

[oneforthebus]

https://www.henryford.com/news/2025/09/vaccine-study-henry-ford-health

DETROIT – Henry Ford Health, a nationally recognized academic medical center and research institution, has issued a cease-and-desist letter to the makers of an upcoming “documentary” that falsely and dangerously claims the health system suppressed a draft of a research paper because of its results. The health system also condemns the purposeful twisting of information and the spread of disinformation happening on the topic, which poses a direct threat to public health.

There are many factors that determine whether a research paper should be submitted for consideration by scientific journals or otherwise shared with the public. In this case, a 2020 draft of a paper that aimed to compare health outcomes for vaccinated and unvaccinated children was immediately shelved upon the first internal peer review because of serious issues with its data and methodology. Those flaws included:

• The unvaccinated patient sample was vastly different than the vaccinated sample, with more males, more white children, less prematurity and less respiratory distress at birth.
• The unvaccinated sample was very small in comparison to the vaccinated sample.
• The amount of time measuring occurrence of disease was much shorter for the unvaccinated children. One quarter were observed only through six months of age, and 75% were only observed up until age 3, which is before doctors can confidently diagnose chronic pediatric diseases.
• The draft compared multiple vaccines vs. no vaccines, instead of a specific vaccine vs. no vaccines.No consideration was given to the number of vaccines or the duration of time between vaccines and the occurrence of disease.
• Vaccine guidance has changed over time, but that was not taken into consideration.

The draft was never considered for submission to journals because it did not remotely come close to meeting the rigorous scientific standards the system demands—the same standards journals have, too. Claims that Henry Ford Health kept or suppressed the results from the public due to political reasons are patently false, defamatory and troubling; it’s important the public receives the truth, as this may lead to families making health decisions based on unfounded and incorrect assumptions.

Henry Ford Health was unaware this rejected and unvalidated draft from the early COVID era had somehow been shared or was being discussed, and the health system was never given an opportunity to weigh in on the topic. In addition, because the draft was shared without the system’s knowledge, there’s reason to believe it’s been altered from its original form and made to appear finalized, which it was not.

In addition, this flawed paper is now also being falsely connected to a long-term, NIH-funded research cohort at Henry Ford Health. The disinformation being presented on social media is dangerous, as it aims to sow doubt in the legitimacy of the ongoing research. The health system urges anyone who comes across content regarding this discredited draft to recognize it’s being weaponized.

Henry Ford Health believes in research that’s driven by irrefutable data and methodology and will never compromise those standards.

 

[oneforthebus]

https://www.henryford.com/news/2025/09/henry-ford-health-vaccine-study-fact-check

DETROIT—Henry Ford Health condemns the spread of dangerous disinformation connected to a “documentary” that falsely claims our nationally recognized academic medical center and research institute suppressed a draft of a research study because of its results.

The purposeful twisting of information in the “documentary” poses a direct public threat. We implore anyone who comes across these myths to read the facts below.

MYTH #1: “The study proves vaccinated children are 2.5x more likely to develop chronic health conditions than unvaccinated children.”

FACT: This draft did not prove anything. The very first internal review revealed serious flaws in the data and methodology, and the paper was abandoned. Anyone who conducts public health research would agree that comparing vastly different sample sizes over different time periods with inconsistent demographic foundations is problematic.

MYTH #2: “The study wasn’t published due to political reasons – or because of its results.”

FACT: The draft wasn’t submitted for publication or shared with the public because the data and analyses were flawed, and it’s irresponsible to share scientifically flawed studies with the public.

MYTH #3: “The study was hidden from the public.”

FACT: Reputable academic medical research institutions like Henry Ford Health subject research papers to stringent, internal, and scientific scrutiny that often points out issues with data, methodology or other flaws. It’s rare that a paper makes it to the scientific journal submission phase, and even rarer that papers get published. This wasn’t hidden; it was simply rejected for scientific lapses.

MYTH #4: “This is the ‘most important vaccine study ever.’”

FACT: Dr. Jake Scott, an infectious disease physician from Stanford who testified on Capitol Hill, wrote “…this flawed analysis reveals how thoroughly political theater has replaced scientific literacy in our public discourse.” The first internal reviewers determined the paper wasn’t scientifically sound—and it never made it past draft status.

MYTH #5: “The ‘documentary’ proves the health system is withholding the study.”

FACT: The film proved nothing except that we have rigorous scientific standards in place for a reason: to ensure the only studies we submit for publication come from research rooted in sound, infallible data that have passed our stringent review processes. We do not bend to pressure from those with special interests and will never compromise the standards that have helped make us a world-renowned academic medical research institution. Read more on our perspective in this Detroit Free Press article.

 

[Superman]

What “handlers”? You seriously think scientists, doctors and pharmaceutical researchers are “handlers”, but anti-vax advocacy groups are honest and pure?

my reference was not directed at you. more at the flogtard who laps up everything without any question.

i dont believe that doctors (or even dokkturs) genuinely intended to deceive anyone regarding the ClotShot, I do believe that they (like the rest of us) were not given ALL the information on the vaccine that was not a vaccine.

 

[warriors42]

Are you saying that drug companies keep secret the side effects that a drug may cause?

That would contradict every drug commercial I’ve seen.

No I don't think it's a secret at all. If it was a secret everyone would be two damn scared to say anything to anyone. I am saying they know what the they are doing, I am saying that I believe they make these drugs with chemicals that they know cause added side effects and maybe with a little more work they could get rid of some of the side effects if they really wanted to, but it's not cost effective I am also saying they don't want cures for the average everyday American they want to keep you on these meds.


Look at mental health medications. what is one of the main side effect? SUICIDE. you can't make this **** up.

 

[warriors42]

a

Medications have side effects, I acknowledged that numerous times. Sometimes more medications are required to counteract side effects. All medical treatments are a balance of risk vs. benefit. I've acknowledged that numerous times.

So you know people who work for pharmaceutical companies and admit they PURPOSELY create useless medications to cause side effects in order to sell more medications? Are you friends with these people? They seem like terrible people. I would certainly alert law enforcement and the media if someone told me that.

You really believe all or most people involved in medical research and pharmacology are complicit in this plot of hiding cures for horrible life threatening illnesses in order to make money? No one is willing to blow the whistle and say "Hey! We can actually cure this but we'd lose a lot of money if we do! We like money so much we're willing to let people suffer and die! Including moms, dads, babies, little children, even people in our own families! We don't care! We're just that greedy and evil!"

Not one single person involved is willing to tell people the "truth".

That's what you believe? Ok. You can believe what you want. I don't believe that. You can say I'm talking down to people. I'm just saying what I believe and what evidence shows. You don't have to agree.

OFTB. I try and look at things from different angles and looking at our health care, **** just doesn't add up. every drug on the market has side effects, yet conviently enough there is a pill for that.

Why after so much time and so much money being spent do we not have a cure for anything? why with all the technology we have are any women still dying from breast cancer. why do we not automattically do the extra steps in yearly blood test to look for cancer markers or markers for heart failure? the simple answer is cost. I believe we have people that are geniuses that probably have come up with cures for things but it will never be released to the public for two reasons. money and population control.

So I personally take a medication called Entresto the side effects are too numerous to list. that said they recently came out with a generic so my insurance company immediately kicked me over to that. I asked my dr. and my pharmacist what the differance was. both told me there was zero differance, if that were the case than why is the generic pill twice the size and a differant color, why am I now after being switched from name brand to generic starting to have some those side effects? Now I am on two more prescriptions to counter act the side effects of the generic I am on.

Why is it I was told by two differeant cardiologyst that even though I am no longer in heart failure I need to stay on all these meds for "preventitive care" I had zero heart problems before the jab but now I'm sentenced to a life time of medications after the jab.

Now I know this is a different topic, but even though my DR. has tried to put me back on the name brand where I had no side effects, the insurance company keeps denying the request because its cheaper for them to put me on two cheaper meds than it was for them to keep me on the name brand.

Four years ago I took one pill a day which was a low dose blood pressure pill. here I am today taking eight pills in the morning and six at night, two of which are to combat the side effects of some of the medications i am now on.

Marijuana has a ton of medical benifits yet our federal government a quite a few states refuse to legalize it and pharma companies spend millions lobbing against it. Why? if people could grow their own pain meds the govenmet and pharma would lose a **** ton of money.

And there is nothing to blow the whistle on. like was pointed out to me earlier. they know about the side effects they put them in every add on TV. the sad part is some of the side effects seem worse than the diease.

Maybe it's just as simple as it's a race to see who can be first to market with the new pill or shot.

 

[oneforthebus]

OFTB. I try and look at things from different angles and looking at our health care, **** just doesn't add up. every drug on the market has side effects, yet conviently enough there is a pill for that.

Why after so much time and so much money being spent do we not have a cure for anything? why with all the technology we have are any women still dying from breast cancer. why do we not automattically do the extra steps in yearly blood test to look for cancer markers or markers for heart failure? the simple answer is cost. I believe we have people that are geniuses that probably have come up with cures for things but it will never be released to the public for two reasons. money and population control.

So I personally take a medication called Entresto the side effects are too numerous to list. that said they recently came out with a generic so my insurance company immediately kicked me over to that. I asked my dr. and my pharmacist what the differance was. both told me there was zero differance, if that were the case than why is the generic pill twice the size and a differant color, why am I now after being switched from name brand to generic starting to have some those side effects? Now I am on two more prescriptions to counter act the side effects of the generic I am on.

Why is it I was told by two differeant cardiologyst that even though I am no longer in heart failure I need to stay on all these meds for "preventitive care" I had zero heart problems before the jab but now I'm sentenced to a life time of medications after the jab.

Now I know this is a different topic, but even though my DR. has tried to put me back on the name brand where I had no side effects, the insurance company keeps denying the request because its cheaper for them to put me on two cheaper meds than it was for them to keep me on the name brand.

Four years ago I took one pill a day which was a low dose blood pressure pill. here I am today taking eight pills in the morning and six at night, two of which are to combat the side effects of some of the medications i am now on.

Marijuana has a ton of medical benifits yet our federal government a quite a few states refuse to legalize it and pharma companies spend millions lobbing against it. Why? if people could grow their own pain meds the govenmet and pharma would lose a **** ton of money.

And there is nothing to blow the whistle on. like was pointed out to me earlier. they know about the side effects they put them in every add on TV. the sad part is some of the side effects seem worse than the diease.

There's a lot here and I'm not a doctor or a pharmacologist. I don't know if the covid vax caused your heart problem, and I'm sorry you're having these problems regardless. I've already acknowledged there are known rare adverse effects, myocarditis is one. I don't discount the possibility. My only point is serious side effects are rare. That's no comfort to anyone who experienced them, i realize that.

You may or may not remember that I have a friend who was deadset against masking and vaccines, a perfectly healthy 58 year old 4.0 tennis player, who died of covid. Another unvaxxed friend with comorbid conditions who also died of covid. Again, it's risk vs. benefit. There is data showing reductions in serious illness and death. But given the rather weak efficacy of the vaccine I don't know exactly where that benefit vs. risk on it lands. My sense is for high risk people it's worth it, for young healthy people probably not. While you may wish you hadn't gotten the vaccine, my friends' families probably wish they had.

What we are debating here is intent. Yes, drug companies want to make money. They also want drugs that are safe and effective. While no drug is 100% free of side effects, they want a strong benefit vs. risk profile. Ultimately no illness and no person are exactly the same and medical interventions are going to affect different people in different ways. We can't throw away the good because it's not perfect. The alternative to medical intervention is we just let a whole bunch of people die or become seriously disabled from preventable or treatable disease.

Insurance is a whole other ball of wax, it's is a totally ****** up system. We're in the limbo between government-run and private health insurance, and it's the worst of both worlds.

 

[ZonaBurgh]