Karen's brother died after getting jab; MOH expert panel says it was not vaccine related.

[batman1]

We need an Independent Ombudsman.

 

[Leongsam]

We need an Independent Ombudsman.

An independent ombudsman appointed by the PAP.

 

[winners]

I think someone must seriously ask the MOH and Pinky on how are they going to define and account for deaths and disabilities immediately after being vaccinated? Otherwise, every time whenever a case will occur, they and their fucking hospitals are all in cahoot to say that the cause of death is not related to the vaccination, Period. This is as good as saying "you die your problem". A BIG FUCK TO THE PAP for misleading the public on their assurance to compensate those who had gone down after their vaccination.

I can agree that the vaccines do have fatal effects on certain people and those going for it must be prepared for such consequences. However, the government must keep to its promise to compensate those (death or permanent disability) cases which have been occurring, instead of always using the same excuse by saying that their deaths are not vaccine related.

 

[Leongsam]

I think someone must seriously ask the MOH and Pinky on how are they going to define and account for deaths and disabilities immediately after being vaccinated? Otherwise, every time whenever a case will occur, they and their fucking hospitals are all in cahoot to say that the cause of death is not related to the vaccination, Period. This is as good as saying "you die your problem". A BIG FUCK TO THE PAP for misleading the public on their assurance to compensate those who had gone down after their vaccination.

I can agree that the vaccines do have fatal effects on certain people and those going for it must be prepared for such consequences. However, the government must keep to its promise to compensate those (death or permanent disability) cases which have been occurring, instead of always using the same excuse by saying that their deaths are not vaccine related.

Since when has the PAP clearly defined anything?

 

[batman1]

Since when has the PAP clearly defined anything?

Sam, u are correct on this point.

 

[Leongsam]

Sam, u are correct on this point.

I'm always correct. Sometimes it just takes a bit longer for people to realise how insightful I am in matters that pique my interest.

In 2 year's time we'll revisit Covid and it will be blatantly clear that everything I said about corona was spot on.

 

[mahjongking]

I'm always correct. Sometimes it just takes a bit longer for people to realise how insightful I am in matters that pique my interest.

In 2 year's time we'll revisit Covid and it will be blatantly clear that everything I said about corona was spot on.

though I agree with you
you not Burmese lah......you Teochew , so How Lian

 

[laksaboy]

Since when has the PAP clearly defined anything?

Ambiguity is essential for shifting goal posts, 'rethinks' or u-turns later on.

Don't forget plausible deniability.

The aura of infallibility must be maintained in the technocrats.

 

[theblackhole]

nobody forced you
you went voluntarily
got the jab willingly
'then something happenrd
which may not be due to the vaccine
you cry foul ...what dah!!!

 

[rushifa666]

There should be a Independent Panel of Doctors to verify whether death was due to vaccination.

i repeat i have not heard of ONE single case where the assholes paid up. These old fools go in on false insurance then now famiky gets nothing.

 

[nightsafari]

I think someone must seriously ask the MOH and Pinky on how are they going to define and account for deaths and disabilities immediately after being vaccinated? Otherwise, every time whenever a case will occur, they and their fucking hospitals are all in cahoot to say that the cause of death is not related to the vaccination, Period. This is as good as saying "you die your problem". A BIG FUCK TO THE PAP for misleading the public on their assurance to compensate those who had gone down after their vaccination.

I can agree that the vaccines do have fatal effects on certain people and those going for it must be prepared for such consequences. However, the government must keep to its promise to compensate those (death or permanent disability) cases which have been occurring, instead of always using the same excuse by saying that their deaths are not vaccine related.

It's a global thing. Drug companies are exempt from any liability relating to vaccine-related injuries. Nobody gives a shit. Not the companies developing it and not the countries requiring you to get it.

 

[nightsafari]

I'm always correct. Sometimes it just takes a bit longer for people to realise how insightful I am in matters that pique my interest.

uh... no...

In 2 year's time we'll revisit Covid and it will be blatantly clear that everything I said about corona was spot on.

actually, I've been thinking. You may have been right initially with the original strain. But currently with all the mutated versions, I don't think you can claim that anymore...

 

[batman1]

WHAT is the cost of vaccination (per dosage) = ?? If the cost is not too expensive,u may want to delay vaccination or opt out. Maybe later,u can get a vaccination from your GP if necessary.

 

[Leongsam]

actually, I've been thinking. You may have been right initially with the original strain. But currently with all the mutated versions, I don't think you can claim that anymore...

So far there hasn't been a single mutated strain that has shown itself to be more lethal than the original.

Even this so called "double mutation" currently in India is just as benign as the first strain out of Wuhan.

These mutation narratives are nothing more than efforts by the media to milk Covid for as long as possible.

 

[Leongsam]

uh... no...


actually, I've been thinking. You may have been right initially with the original strain. But currently with all the mutated versions, I don't think you can claim that anymore...

Here's how it plays out..... the initial headlines will take whatever data the media finds that suits their purpose :


Editors' Pick|Mar 15, 2021,10:13am EDT|90,342 views
U.K. Coronavirus Variant Is Significantly More Deadly, Says New Study

Victoria Forster
Contributor

Health
Cancer research scientist and childhood cancer survivor.

The B.1.1.7 coronavirus variant "UK variant" is more deadly as well as more transmissible, according ... [+]

getty
The U.K. coronavirus variant known as B.1.1.7 is not only more transmissible, but also more deadly than other coronavirus variants, according to a new study published today.


B.1.1.7 was first identified in the U.K. last fall and by December it was detected in several other countries including the U.S. The variant is known to be substantially more transmissible than other SARS-CoV2 coronavirus lineages and quickly took over as the dominant variant in the U.K., late last year, sparking off a damaging and deadly second wave which leaves the U.K. currently second in the world for the most Covid-19 deaths per 100,000 people.


However when the dust settles this is the result....


Australian Associated Press
UK virus variant no more severe: study
13 April 2021·2-min read

The British coronavirus variant first detected in Kent and now dominant in the UK and a number of other countries is more transmissible but does not increase disease severity, research suggests.
Two studies have found no evidence people with the B117 variant have worse symptoms or a heightened risk of developing long COVID than those with a different strain.
However viral load and the reproduction (R) number were higher for B117, adding to growing evidence it is more transmissible than the first strain detected in Wuhan, China, in December 2019.
One observational study of patients in London hospitals suggests the variant is not associated with more severe illness and death but appears to lead to higher viral load.
A separate study using data logged by 37,000 UK users of a self-reporting coronavirus symptom app found no evidence the variant altered symptoms or likelihood of experiencing long COVID.
Authors of both studies acknowledge their findings differ from some other studies exploring the severity of the variant and have called for more research.
The emergence of variants has raised concerns about whether they could spread easily and be more deadly, and that vaccines might be less effective against them.
Findings from the new studies, conducted between September and December when B117 emerged and started spreading across parts of England, provide insights into its characteristics that will help inform public health, clinical and research responses.
A paper in The Lancet Infectious Diseases journal is a whole-genome sequencing and cohort study involving coronavirus patients admitted to University College London Hospital and North Middlesex University Hospital between November 9 and December 20.
The authors compared illness severity in people with and without B117 and calculated viral load.
Among 341 patients who had test swabs sequenced, 58 per cent had B117 and 42 per cent had a non-B117 infection.
Researchers found no evidence of an association between the variant and increased severity, with 36 per cent of B117 patients becoming severely ill or dying, compared with 38 per cent of those with a different strain.
Those with the variant were no more likely to die than patients with a different strain, with 16 per cent dying within 28 days compared with 17 per cent for those with a non-B117 infection.
A second study, published in The Lancet Public Health, analysed self-reported data from 36,920 UK users of the COVID Symptom Study app who tested positive for the disease between September 28 and December 27.
The analysis covered 13 full weeks over the period when the proportion of B117 grew most notably in London, the South East and East of England.
For each week in every region in the analysis (Scotland, Wales and the seven England regions), authors calculated the proportion of users reporting any of 14 COVID-19 symptoms.
This revealed no significant associations between the proportion of B117 within regions and the type of symptoms experienced.







Scientists had suspected that B.1.1.7 might be more deadly, as well as more transmissible following spectacularly high numbers of Covid-19 deaths in the U.K. during the second wave this winter, which saw the U.K’s worst daily death total in January claim over 1,800 lives. But, the new study published in the journal Nature, led by researchers at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine all but confirms that this correlation is genuine.


The study looked at viral genetics data from almost 5,000 people in the U.K. who died from Covid-19, with two-thirds of those being confirmed to have the B.1.1.7 variant. It found that people who were infected with B.1.1.7 had a 55% higher risk of dying within 28 days of being tested positive for Covid-19.


“England has suffered an enormous toll from B.1.1.7 in the last few months, with 42,000 COVID-19 deaths in January and February 2021 alone,” said Nick Davies, PhD, lead author from LSHTM’s Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases. “In spite of substantial advances in COVID-19 treatment, we have already seen more deaths in 2021 than we did over the first eight months of the pandemic in 2020. Our work helps to explain why,” Davies added.


The new work follows another study from the U.K. published last week, which showed that people who tested positive for B.1.1.7 in a community setting were also more likely to die within 28 days of a positive test than those with other variants.

 

[nightsafari]

Here's how it plays out..... the initial headlines will take whatever data the media finds that suits their purpose :


Editors' Pick|Mar 15, 2021,10:13am EDT|90,342 views
U.K. Coronavirus Variant Is Significantly More Deadly, Says New Study

Victoria Forster
Contributor

Health
Cancer research scientist and childhood cancer survivor.

The B.1.1.7 coronavirus variant "UK variant" is more deadly as well as more transmissible, according ... [+]

getty
The U.K. coronavirus variant known as B.1.1.7 is not only more transmissible, but also more deadly than other coronavirus variants, according to a new study published today.


B.1.1.7 was first identified in the U.K. last fall and by December it was detected in several other countries including the U.S. The variant is known to be substantially more transmissible than other SARS-CoV2 coronavirus lineages and quickly took over as the dominant variant in the U.K., late last year, sparking off a damaging and deadly second wave which leaves the U.K. currently second in the world for the most Covid-19 deaths per 100,000 people.


However when the dust settles this is the result....


Australian Associated Press
UK virus variant no more severe: study
13 April 2021·2-min read

The British coronavirus variant first detected in Kent and now dominant in the UK and a number of other countries is more transmissible but does not increase disease severity, research suggests.
Two studies have found no evidence people with the B117 variant have worse symptoms or a heightened risk of developing long COVID than those with a different strain.
However viral load and the reproduction (R) number were higher for B117, adding to growing evidence it is more transmissible than the first strain detected in Wuhan, China, in December 2019.
One observational study of patients in London hospitals suggests the variant is not associated with more severe illness and death but appears to lead to higher viral load.
A separate study using data logged by 37,000 UK users of a self-reporting coronavirus symptom app found no evidence the variant altered symptoms or likelihood of experiencing long COVID.
Authors of both studies acknowledge their findings differ from some other studies exploring the severity of the variant and have called for more research.
The emergence of variants has raised concerns about whether they could spread easily and be more deadly, and that vaccines might be less effective against them.
Findings from the new studies, conducted between September and December when B117 emerged and started spreading across parts of England, provide insights into its characteristics that will help inform public health, clinical and research responses.
A paper in The Lancet Infectious Diseases journal is a whole-genome sequencing and cohort study involving coronavirus patients admitted to University College London Hospital and North Middlesex University Hospital between November 9 and December 20.
The authors compared illness severity in people with and without B117 and calculated viral load.
Among 341 patients who had test swabs sequenced, 58 per cent had B117 and 42 per cent had a non-B117 infection.
Researchers found no evidence of an association between the variant and increased severity, with 36 per cent of B117 patients becoming severely ill or dying, compared with 38 per cent of those with a different strain.
Those with the variant were no more likely to die than patients with a different strain, with 16 per cent dying within 28 days compared with 17 per cent for those with a non-B117 infection.
A second study, published in The Lancet Public Health, analysed self-reported data from 36,920 UK users of the COVID Symptom Study app who tested positive for the disease between September 28 and December 27.
The analysis covered 13 full weeks over the period when the proportion of B117 grew most notably in London, the South East and East of England.
For each week in every region in the analysis (Scotland, Wales and the seven England regions), authors calculated the proportion of users reporting any of 14 COVID-19 symptoms.
This revealed no significant associations between the proportion of B117 within regions and the type of symptoms experienced.







Scientists had suspected that B.1.1.7 might be more deadly, as well as more transmissible following spectacularly high numbers of Covid-19 deaths in the U.K. during the second wave this winter, which saw the U.K’s worst daily death total in January claim over 1,800 lives. But, the new study published in the journal Nature, led by researchers at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine all but confirms that this correlation is genuine.


The study looked at viral genetics data from almost 5,000 people in the U.K. who died from Covid-19, with two-thirds of those being confirmed to have the B.1.1.7 variant. It found that people who were infected with B.1.1.7 had a 55% higher risk of dying within 28 days of being tested positive for Covid-19.


“England has suffered an enormous toll from B.1.1.7 in the last few months, with 42,000 COVID-19 deaths in January and February 2021 alone,” said Nick Davies, PhD, lead author from LSHTM’s Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases. “In spite of substantial advances in COVID-19 treatment, we have already seen more deaths in 2021 than we did over the first eight months of the pandemic in 2020. Our work helps to explain why,” Davies added.


The new work follows another study from the U.K. published last week, which showed that people who tested positive for B.1.1.7 in a community setting were also more likely to die within 28 days of a positive test than those with other variants.

ah... so you agree? I've only just started noticing young people starting to die of this.

 

[Leongsam]

ah... so you agree? I've only just started noticing young people starting to die of this.

Many viruses kill. However for the young flu is far more serious. The fatality rate for Covid is a lot lower.

 

[mojito]

You have a flawed sense of logic. Maybe you pee in your pants before pulling it down in real life?

Volunteer to be vaccinated is not the issue. Who doesn’t want to gain some form of protection against a deadly disease ?

You must be middle management. Be cause your analogies are terrible.

 

[mojito]

We had a few deaths from covid. Will the deaths from vaxxing exceed that number, I wonder.

 

[laksaboy]

We had a few deaths from covid. Will the deaths from vaxxing exceed that number, I wonder.

If the deaths come months or years after vaccination, they will insist the victims died of some other cause.

Sometimes, blaming old age helps.