Can we believe governmedia statistics??

Let's look at some examples

Oct 10, 2021

Have you looked at governmedia definitions of vaccinated vs unvaccinated in their reports?

I think you should. It is important to know as we keep getting bombarded by the governmedia with statistics that always seem to blame those that choose not to get COVID vaccinations for many of the ills in the world. My task today is to find out if this is true and open up a civil common sense logical discussion in the comments.

If you do not yet subscribe to Bad Cattitude on substack, you really should.

bad cattitude

why "vaccinated covid deaths/hospitalizations" are being counted incorrectly

let’s start with an example: you’re a soldier pinned down in a foxhole. across the field from you is a bunker. getting into the bunker will greatly reduce your risk of being shot. but the field you must cross is wide open to enemy fire. if you’re going to make the choice to run for the bunker, on what would you base it…

4 years ago · 156 likes · 65 comments · el gato malo

The Bad Cat has been doing some great analytical work throughout COVID and was likely on to something early on as Bad Cat had their twitter account suspended about 6 months ago likely for coming to different conclusions about all that is COVID than the governmedia.

What would the world look like today without social media censorship??

Whether the Bad Cat is/was correct is not the topic for discussion today. But either way we should all be allowed to openly discuss and debate issues freely without fear of censorship, coercion, bullying or employment.

With that being said, let's get back on topic and start with how we define medication side effects with an example.

EXAMPLE 1:

You are started on a new blood pressure medication.

Let's call this new Big Pharma medication XStatic.

Why XStatic??

Well, Big Pharma loves names that sound wonderful and that contains either a letter J, Q, V, X, Z or any combination of all of them. Put two letters that never go together and you might have a blockbuster, I'm actually waiting for a new med to be named JaQuiXZee or QuiZJaX or something along those lines. Wouldn't you love to be paid to be in those focus groups?? Talk about blood money......

You are told the full effectiveness of XStatic on lowering your blood pressure will not be known until you have used the medication for 14 days. But 3 days or 72 hours after you begin XStatic, whichever comes first, you develop lethargy, swelling in your legs and palpitations. You have changed nothing else in your diet, lifestyle or other medications.

You first call your doc and tell them about how you feel and that these symptoms began 3 days after starting XStatic. Do you think your doc would discuss whether the side effects are indeed from XStatic or would your doc say, "The effectiveness of XStatic in lowering blood pressure is not known for 14 days so your symptoms that began only 3 days after starting XStatic can NOT be from XStatic." ????

Somehow I have faith in my colleagues that they would ask the right questions and most likely place the symptoms on Xstatic.

Unfortunately this common sense thought process does not seem to apply when it comes to COVID vaccines.

Let's look at some CDC criteria for the COVID vaccinations.

UNvaccinated:
You are considered UNvaccinated until 14 days after your second dose of Pfizer or Moderna COVID vaccine or 14 days after your one dose of Johnson and Johnson COVID vaccine.

Vaccinated:
You are considered fully Vaccinated 14 days after your second dose of Pfizer or Moderna COVID vaccine or 14 days after your one dose of Johnson and Johnson COVID vaccine.

What does this mean in terms of adverse event/side effect reporting?

Let's look at a few more examples.

EXAMPLE 2:

You are a healthy person who has not yet had COVID prior to Jan 1st. We call this being COVID naive.

You get your first Pfizer/Moderna vaccine dose on Jan 1st.

If you get sick with COVID before your second dose, you get counted as UNvaccinated in the statistics even though you already had a vaccine dose with their mRNA lipid nanoparticle treatment.

If you get a side effect soon after the 1st dose of the vaccine, such as headaches, bleeding, blood clots or worse, these effects still get counted as in the UNvaccinated. These side effects are NOT tabulated as a possible side effect of the vaccine. You are told it is a coincidence and has nothing to do with a vaccine/treatment you were just given.

Somehow side effects and efficacy of the vaccine treatment have different rules for governmedia statistics.

EXAMPLE 3:

You get yours second dose of Pfizer/Moderna dose on Feb 1st.

If you get sick with COVID before Feb 15th, or less than 14 days from the second dose, you still get counted as UNvaccinated in the statistics even though you had two doses of COVID vaccination with mRNA lipid nanoparticle treatment.

So getting COVID as well as all the potential side effects from the COVID before being in what the CDC defines as fully vaccinated get blamed on being UNvaccinated, thus increasing the notion that UNvaccinated people are at higher risk and possibly driving the pandemic. But these people have had either one or both of their COVID vaccine treatments. They should not be lumped into the Unvaccinated group. There should be a partially vaccinated group as well.

Prediction:

How long before the Unvaccinated group expands to being anyone who has not had their booster COVID vaccine?

If you gamble in Vegas I think the over/under is November 15th, 2021.

I wonder what the statistics would look like if we had 8 groups.

1- Unvaccinated and never had COVID

2- Partially Vaccinated

3- Fully Vaccinated

4- Fully Vaccinated greater than 3 months

5- Fully Vaccinated greater than 6 months

6- Fully Vaccinated and had COVID after vaccination

7- Fully Vaccinated and had COVID prior to beginning vaccination

8- Unvaccinated and had COVID

I also wonder how the statistics would look for the Vaccinated during the first two weeks after a shot as well as a breakdown among different age groups and other risk factors?

These questions are not rocket science but just common sense logical thinking. Is that too much to ask of the CDC and the governmedia.

Again, please subscribe to Bad Cattitude as the Bad Cat is looking at COVID and doing some great common sense logical thinking.

So we looked at how statistics are being used for COVID vaccines.

I ask why is this statistical criteria different for XStatic?

I understand how the CDC may not want to count someone as fully vaccinated until they complete their series of shots, but side effects of any treatment should begin to be counted as soon as you start a treatment.

Example 4:

You get your first shot of Pfizer COVID vaccine. Ten minutes later you develop a rash, swelling and low blood pressure.

Is this counted as a side effect?

Yes it is.

But if this occurs 5 days later, somehow it is not.

If a healthy 35 year old mother of three develops blood clots in her lungs 5 days after a COVID vaccine, why is this not counted as a vaccine side effect? Instead it is either ignored or counted as a blood clot in an UNvaccinated person thereby increasing the percentage of illness in the UNvaccinated and decreasing the percentage of illness in the Vaccinated. These are the statistical machinations many see going on with COVID. I have discussed this with many healthcare professionals. They are seeing many more coincidences than are being reported.

How should this be looked at?

Pretty simple if we use common sense and logic.

You are Unvaccinated if you never had a COVID vaccination.

You are partially vaccinated beginning the moment of your first dose of Pfizer or Moderna COVID vaccine.

You are fully vaccinated beginning the day of your second dose of either Pfizer or Moderna COVID vaccine or your one dose of J&J COVID vaccine.

You are not fully protected until 14 days after your second dose of Pfizer or Moderna or your one dose of J&J COVID vaccine.

We should look at all the positives and negatives of COVID vaccines with the same criteria above.

I would like to see all the governmedia COVID numbers with the above breakdown not just for COVID cases, hospitalizations and deaths, but also for any and all potential side effects we have been hearing about.

If we get to see all the real numbers both good and not so good for COVID and the vaccines, we would have a truer informed consent process which would lead to hopefully better decision making on what is best for us individually to protect us from COVID.

Now I will open it up for discussion.

Common Sense Health and Wellness

Discussion about this post