An Estimate of Excess COVID Deaths Resulting from Non-Vaccination

 

I’ve put together a calculation of the number of excess COVID deaths over the past month that have resulted from non-vaccination.  Obviously, this calculation is only an estimate and relies on certain assumptions.

The algebra on this is fairly easy, though I won’t bore you with the derivation (which would be difficult to display without special text features anyway).  If:

  • n = number of deaths from COVID
  • IRR = incident rate ratio for death from COVID (i.e. the ratio of the death rates among the unvaccinated and the vaccinated)
  • PV = the percentage of the population that is vaccinated

Then the number of deaths among the vaccinated (DV) is:  DV = n x PV / (PV + ((1-PV) x IRR)).

The number of deaths among the unvaccinated (DU) is:  DU = n – DV

The number of excess deaths among the unvaccinated (DE) is:  DE = DU (1 – 1/IRR)

The latest estimate that I’ve seen of the IRR is 11.3, from this CDC report.  This means that an unvaccinated person is 11.3 times more likely to die from Covid than a vaccinated person.  The CDC reports (here) that the national vaccination rate (PV) is 53.8% of the entire population, 64.9% of the population aged 18 or older, and 82.5% of the population aged 65 and over.  As I suspect that Covid deaths continue to be concentrated among older people, I used two PV figures for my estimate: 65% and 80%.  (Note that in these calculations, a higher PV figure results in a lower number for excess deaths among the unvaccinated, so these are conservative figures.)

Finally, I used Worldometer (here) as a source for Covid deaths, selecting the one-month period from August 12 to September 11.  I calculated that a total of 39,384 deaths were reported in this period.

Here are the results, which do differ depending on the vaccination rate (PV) that I assumed for the calculation.

Assuming 65% vaccination (PV=0.65):  Deaths among the vaccinated (DV) is 5,559; deaths among the unvaccinated (DU) is 33,825; excess deaths among the unvaccinated (DE) is 30,832.

Assuming 80% vaccination (PV=0.80): Deaths among the vaccinated (DV) is 10,296; deaths among the unvaccinated (DU) is 29,088; excess deaths among the unvaccinated (DE) is 26,513.

As a sensitivity analysis, I also ran the calculation for a somewhat lower death figure (38,000) and a somewhat lower vaccine effectiveness (IRR=10).  This yielded estimates of excess deaths among the unvaccinated of 24,429-28,843.  Obviously, these are estimates, so while I report the precise figures determined by my calculations (to the nearest whole number), I think that these figures should be interpreted as a reasonable range.

Based on these figures, I think that it’s reasonable to conclude that about 24,000 to 30,000 Americans died of COVID, during the month ending 9/11/2021, because they were not vaccinated.  That’s about 8-10 times the death toll from the actual 9/11.  Another way of thinking about it is that we’ve had a 9/11-worth of death every 3-4 days over the past month, due to individual decisions not to be vaccinated.

The vaccinations may have caused other problems, as there are some side effects, and there may be future side effects.

This death toll probably explains the President’s actions in mandating vaccination in a number of circumstances.  You may or may not agree with his decision as a policy matter, but I think that it is important to understand the death toll that he probably considered in making his decision.

For the record, I disagree with the President’s decision about vaccine mandates.  If people prefer to risk death from Covid rather than take a chance on vaccination, I would respect that decision.  I respect the decision of the 24,000-30,000 Americans who, by my estimate, died during the past month or so as a result of their decision not to be vaccinated.

If I were in charge, I would not require anyone to be vaccinated.  I would reopen everything including schools, put an end to all mask requirements everywhere, report the facts, and continue to offer free vaccination to any American who wants it.

Two other related points:

  • The Worldometer graphs for both cases and deaths suggest that we’re past the peak of the current wave, and things are going to get better over the next month or two.  No guarantees, but this seems to be the trend.
  • There is some evidence that the efficacy of the vaccines diminishes over time.  The CDC is now recommending a booster shot for those who received the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine, 8 months after their second shot, for people who are moderately to severely immunocompromised.  FDA approval of this recommendation is pending.  If this recommendation remains in effect, I will plan to get a booster shot myself, next January.

For those of you who are not vaccinated, I do urge you to do consider getting the shot, for the sake of your own health.  Well, with some caveats.  We don’t have a precise figure for risks and benefits, but my general sense is that you should probably get the shot if you’re over 40; that it’s a close call if you’re 25-40; and that you shouldn’t get the shot if you’re under 25.

However, each of you has to weigh the risks and benefits, and I will respect your decision.  I hope that this information proves helpful.

Published in Healthcare
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 189 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    You know, all the pre-vaccine deaths count as “resulting from non-vaccination” . . .

    • #61
  2. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    J Climacus (View Comment):

     

    My relationship with medical experts has always been that they presented the options and associated risks, and allowed me the patient to make the medical decisions. It wasn’t that I simply blindly followed whatever they said. I am very suspicious of any expert (in any field) who thinks his role as an expert is to be a dictator who must be unquestionably followed.

    For some reason this is now where we are with covid. Doctors X,Y, and Z say it is safe so shut up and get the jab. But what if I’m 25 years old, healthy, and had covid last year with little problem? Shut up. Get the jab. But the science says that I’m at virtually no risk for covid? Shut up. Get the jab. We said it’s safe.

    Now it’s shut up, get the jab, or lose your job. This has gone way beyond anything about health.

     

    Well sort of but not really. Doctors will give you options and risks for your torn rotator cuff, high blood pressure or bulging disk in your back. Surgery or conservative treatment, medication or exercise.

    That is not been the advise for most vaccines. The doctor, cannot personally force you to do anything. Their recommendation, with a few exceptions (allergy to something in the vaccine, certain cancer treatments) has always been shut up and take the shot. From Polio, small pox, measles to the flu. The advice on vaccines, unless something in your medical history contradicts it, has always been shut up and take the shot. 

    • #62
  3. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    Jager (View Comment):
    The advice on vaccines, unless something in your medical history contradicts it, has always been shut up and take the shot. 

    Which is why I’m looking for a new pediatrician for the kids due for their first HPV vaccine. Vaccines are pushed like propaganda. In most things, If you can’t question it, it’s likely propaganda.

    On another note, Covid hospitalizations are being misrepresented. Tracks with DeSantis’ hospital administrator round table discussion.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/new-study-suggests-almost-half-all-covid-hospitalizations-january-june-had-mild-or

    Story links to the Atlantic for any source snobs.

    • #63
  4. J Climacus Member
    J Climacus
    @JClimacus

    Jager (View Comment):

    J Climacus (View Comment):

     

    My relationship with medical experts has always been that they presented the options and associated risks, and allowed me the patient to make the medical decisions. It wasn’t that I simply blindly followed whatever they said. I am very suspicious of any expert (in any field) who thinks his role as an expert is to be a dictator who must be unquestionably followed.

    For some reason this is now where we are with covid. Doctors X,Y, and Z say it is safe so shut up and get the jab. But what if I’m 25 years old, healthy, and had covid last year with little problem? Shut up. Get the jab. But the science says that I’m at virtually no risk for covid? Shut up. Get the jab. We said it’s safe.

    Now it’s shut up, get the jab, or lose your job. This has gone way beyond anything about health.

     

    Well sort of but not really. Doctors will give you options and risks for your torn rotator cuff, high blood pressure or bulging disk in your back. Surgery or conservative treatment, medication or exercise.

    That is not been the advise for most vaccines. The doctor, cannot personally force you to do anything. Their recommendation, with a few exceptions (allergy to something in the vaccine, certain cancer treatments) has always been shut up and take the shot. From Polio, small pox, measles to the flu. The advice on vaccines, unless something in your medical history contradicts it, has always been shut up and take the shot.

    That’s not my experience. I never get the flu shot and my doctor never orders me to get it. I tell him I never get the flu anyway and he’s fine with it. Is covid really more dangerous to me than the flu? Not if you are young – flu is more dangerous. With respect to polio, small pox, and the measles, there was never a propaganda campaign needed to convince people to take the vaccines. I got those vaccines and my kids did as well. The danger of those diseases was and is manifest. My parents, and all parents, were thankful those vaccines came out because they saw the kids with polio when they themselves were young. Yet with covid, when I ask why a young person should get the jab and wear a mask when the science – and experience – clearly shows they are at virtually no risk, I’m told to shut up and do it. When I ask why states with no vaccine or mask mandates have covid rates similar to those that do, I’m told to shut up and get the jab. This doesn’t give me confidence that this vaccine is just another vaccine like the measles.

    • #64
  5. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    J Climacus (View Comment):
    When I ask why states with no vaccine or mask mandates have covid rates similar to those that do, I’m told to shut up and get the jab. This doesn’t give me confidence that this vaccine is just another vaccine like the measles.

    Not sure which thread I said this on, so pardon me if this is repetitive, but for me the most disturbing, most atypical aspect of this thing has nothing to do with the vaccine itself, but with the government flexing on us.  I didn’t start out opposed to vaccinations and testing — I got that way through the abusive treatment being meted out by Our Betters.

    It’s complicated, and that’s not the only consideration in my own decision-making, but that’s the one that’s flashing red.

    • #65
  6. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    BDB (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):
    If the Delta wave peaked about August 22, why did daily new cases and new deaths keep going up in the U.S.? Are we all in agreement that up is down now?

    ON worldometer, for the US new daily cases have definitely peaked (describing, not predicting — anything can happen, but solidly on the downslope), while new daily deaths have peaked or are peaking. Both of these using the 7-day moving average.

    I’ve been using OurWorldInData rather than worldometer lately. They both show basically the same thing (with a peak occurring a couple of weeks after August 22) but the last few days are portrayed differently. I suspect a difference in the way a 7-day moving average is calculated at the boundary, or maybe a difference in the way they get incoming data.

    You can see from either source that we’ve had peaks like this before just before things changed and we went on to new and higher peaks.

    Edit: Here’s the OurWorldInData link that I forgot to include.

    • #66
  7. J Climacus Member
    J Climacus
    @JClimacus

    BDB (View Comment):

    J Climacus (View Comment):
    When I ask why states with no vaccine or mask mandates have covid rates similar to those that do, I’m told to shut up and get the jab. This doesn’t give me confidence that this vaccine is just another vaccine like the measles.

    Not sure which thread I said this on, so pardon me if this is repetitive, but for me the most disturbing, most atypical aspect of this thing has nothing to do with the vaccine itself, but with the government flexing on us. I didn’t start out opposed to vaccinations and testing — I got that way through the abusive treatment being meted out by Our Betters.

    It’s complicated, and that’s not the only consideration in my own decision-making, but that’s the one that’s flashing red.

    Yes, I seem to remember we’ve agreed on this before. I was never particularly anti-vax. I’m confident the vaccines are probably safe, but I also don’t think I’m in much danger from covid. So I didn’t feel strongly about it one way or the other. I chuckled both at the people who thought the vaxxes were some gov’t conspiracy, and at the healthy twenty-somethings who rushed out to get the jab and were so happy they were now safe from the great plague.  It’s when the bullying began that I dug in my heels.

    • #67
  8. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    J Climacus (View Comment):

     

    That’s not my experience. I never get the flu shot and my doctor never orders me to get it. I tell him I never get the flu anyway and he’s fine with it. Is covid really more dangerous to me than the flu? Not if you are young – flu is more dangerous. With respect to polio, small pox, and the measles, there was never a propaganda campaign needed to convince people to take the vaccines. I got those vaccines and my kids did as well. The danger of those diseases was and is manifest. My parents, and all parents, were thankful those vaccines came out because they saw the kids with polio when they themselves were young. Yet with covid, when I ask why a young person should get the jab and wear a mask when the science – and experience – clearly shows they are at virtually no risk, I’m told to shut up and do it. When I ask why states with no vaccine or mask mandates have covid rates similar to those that do, I’m told to shut up and get the jab. This doesn’t give me confidence that this vaccine is just another vaccine like the measles.

    Except that this is just not what happened. There was a campaign to get people to vaccinate their children against Polio, there was a campaign to get people to take the measles vaccine.  There were anti-vaccination Leagues formed in England and the US to protest the small pox vaccine. Now you just take those shots the danger is self-evident and the risks are minimal. 

    • #68
  9. J Climacus Member
    J Climacus
    @JClimacus

    Jager (View Comment):

    J Climacus (View Comment):

     

    That’s not my experience. I never get the flu shot and my doctor never orders me to get it. I tell him I never get the flu anyway and he’s fine with it. Is covid really more dangerous to me than the flu? Not if you are young – flu is more dangerous. With respect to polio, small pox, and the measles, there was never a propaganda campaign needed to convince people to take the vaccines. I got those vaccines and my kids did as well. The danger of those diseases was and is manifest. My parents, and all parents, were thankful those vaccines came out because they saw the kids with polio when they themselves were young. Yet with covid, when I ask why a young person should get the jab and wear a mask when the science – and experience – clearly shows they are at virtually no risk, I’m told to shut up and do it. When I ask why states with no vaccine or mask mandates have covid rates similar to those that do, I’m told to shut up and get the jab. This doesn’t give me confidence that this vaccine is just another vaccine like the measles.

    Except that this is just not what happened. There was a campaign to get people to vaccinate their children against Polio, there was a campaign to get people to take the measles vaccine. There were anti-vaccination Leagues formed in England and the US to protest the small pox vaccine. Now you just take those shots the danger is self-evident and the risks are minimal.

    You’re right, there were such campaigns against vaccinations. I wasn’t aware of them.  It looks like there wasn’t a campaign to convince people to get vaccinated, so much as immediately going to laws to force people to get vaccinated. The anti-vax campaigns were legal actions to get those laws repealed.  I guess we should consider ourselves lucky that Biden is only considering firing you from your job for not getting the jab rather than going to jail.

    I wonder: In 50 years, will the danger to teenagers from COVID be self-evident the way the dangers from polio and measles are today? And we’ll all look back and wonder how parents could allow their kids to be exposed to such a deadly disease? 

    • #69
  10. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    BDB (View Comment):
    Not sure which thread I said this on, so pardon me if this is repetitive, but for me the most disturbing, most atypical aspect of this thing has nothing to do with the vaccine itself, but with the government flexing on us.

    Forgive me if this is a repeat, but I asked someone: In 12 words or less, why does the government want every single person vaccinated?

    The answer was: There are too many people and they want to kill them all off.

    I said: That’s 13.  And he went on about control, and profits and stuff.  And I repeated the question.

    The answer was: You need to control people to kill them off.

    I said: Nine.  That’s better.

    ***

    Does anyone think that the Constitution is being abrogated in order to make pharmaceutical companies pay better dividends?  Or to save people’s lives?  Or to save any national economy?

    • #70
  11. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Does anyone think that the Constitution is being abrogated in order to make pharmaceutical companies pay better dividends?  Or to save people’s lives?  Or to save any national economy?

    I think the Covid control measures have been useful in consolidating the economy into fewer hands. I think that’s one of the WEF goals. Beyond that, I’ve only got guessing games going on and little makes much sense. The common thing seems to be using fear to consolidate control. And I think it is largely working.

    • #71
  12. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Flicker (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Not sure which thread I said this on, so pardon me if this is repetitive, but for me the most disturbing, most atypical aspect of this thing has nothing to do with the vaccine itself, but with the government flexing on us.

    Forgive me if this is a repeat, but I asked someone: In 12 words or less, why does the government want every single person vaccinated?

    The answer was: There are too many people and they want to kill them all off.

    I said: That’s 13. And he went on about control, and profits and stuff. And I repeated the question.

    The answer was: You need to control people to kill them off.

    I said: Nine. That’s better.

    ***

    Does anyone think that the Constitution is being abrogated in order to make pharmaceutical companies pay better dividends? Or to save people’s lives? Or to save any national economy?

    Who are “they” trying to kill and who are “they”?

    96% of all doctors, all 9 supreme court justices, all 50 governors, every living President. Almost every member of Congress. About 60% of the eligible population.  That is who is vaccinated in the US. “They” are trying to kill the rich and the poor, the conservatives and the liberals?

    • #72
  13. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Stina (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Does anyone think that the Constitution is being abrogated in order to make pharmaceutical companies pay better dividends? Or to save people’s lives? Or to save any national economy?

    I think the Covid control measures have been useful in consolidating the economy into fewer hands. I think that’s one of the WEF goals. Beyond that, I’ve only got guessing games going on and little makes much sense. The common thing seems to be using fear to consolidate control. And I think it is largely working.

    Killing I can understand.  Control?  Control to what end?

    To starve them all?  To put them to work picking grapes and strawberries?  To finally get everyone in the world to do the Electric Slide in unison?  (JKing)  But what if, say, ten thousand people own all the money (call it gold) in the world.  And a million people make and repair the robots that make everything else and grow all the food.  And everyone else eats meal worms with feta cheese and soy sauce for free, lives in a free 6×10 cubicle, and sits in a free BarcaLounger that folds back into a bed, watching virtual reality all day, and wants to go to the theater or the park for free, and takes a free robo-car to get there?

    What’s the need to care for all us wastrels?

    • #73
  14. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Jager (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Not sure which thread I said this on, so pardon me if this is repetitive, but for me the most disturbing, most atypical aspect of this thing has nothing to do with the vaccine itself, but with the government flexing on us.

    Forgive me if this is a repeat, but I asked someone: In 12 words or less, why does the government want every single person vaccinated?

    The answer was: There are too many people and they want to kill them all off.

    I said: That’s 13. And he went on about control, and profits and stuff. And I repeated the question.

    The answer was: You need to control people to kill them off.

    I said: Nine. That’s better.

    ***

    Does anyone think that the Constitution is being abrogated in order to make pharmaceutical companies pay better dividends? Or to save people’s lives? Or to save any national economy?

    Who are “they” trying to kill and who are “they”?

    96% of all doctors, all 9 supreme court justices, all 50 governors, every living President. Almost every member of Congress. About 60% of the eligible population. That is who is vaccinated in the US. “They” are trying to kill the rich and the poor, the conservatives and the liberals?

    “They”.  Hmm.  Who is they.  To quote a quote from another OP today:

    Sowell’s concern should be the concern for all citizens of all countries everywhere,

    “The most basic question is not what is best but who shall decide what is best”

    There is a world-wide (at least in the English-speaking world) forced mask-wearing, forced travel limitation, forced vaccination process that is unprecedented in modern times, and perhaps of all time, that is counter-factual, societally destructive, and anti-freedom.  Where did these similar and similarly-dysfunctional edits come from.  Why are they so similar in far-apart countries?  Did they all take their cue from the WHO?  Who does the WHO take its cues from? 

    “They” is whoever decides what is best.  And what is best for whom.

    • #74
  15. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Killing I can understand.  Control?  Control to what end?

     

    I currently don’t think the vaccines are a killing program. I think the vaccine program as currently implemented is a cronyism play. I think whatever bad happens (if it happens) will be from hubris, not intent. I think  they are losing control of the messaging (we aren’t as compliant right now) and that getting rid of a control group will help shore up the messaging around the vaccines.

    If a control group exists and does AT LEAST as well as the vaccinated, they lose control of the situation and the people start moving on.

    As to why control, the only thing I got that makes any human sense is pride, ego, and greed.

    • #75
  16. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Jager (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Not sure which thread I said this on, so pardon me if this is repetitive, but for me the most disturbing, most atypical aspect of this thing has nothing to do with the vaccine itself, but with the government flexing on us.

    Forgive me if this is a repeat, but I asked someone: In 12 words or less, why does the government want every single person vaccinated?

    The answer was: There are too many people and they want to kill them all off.

    I said: That’s 13. And he went on about control, and profits and stuff. And I repeated the question.

    The answer was: You need to control people to kill them off.

    I said: Nine. That’s better.

    ***

    Does anyone think that the Constitution is being abrogated in order to make pharmaceutical companies pay better dividends? Or to save people’s lives? Or to save any national economy?

    Who are “they” trying to kill and who are “they”?

    96% of all doctors, all 9 supreme court justices, all 50 governors, every living President. Almost every member of Congress. About 60% of the eligible population. That is who is vaccinated in the US. “They” are trying to kill the rich and the poor, the conservatives and the liberals?

    “They”. Hmm. Who is they. To quote a quote from another OP today:

    Sowell’s concern should be the concern for all citizens of all countries everywhere,

    “The most basic question is not what is best but who shall decide what is best”

    There is a world-wide (at least in the English-speaking world) forced mask-wearing, forced travel limitation, forced vaccination process that is unprecedented in modern times, and perhaps of all time, that is counter-factual, societally destructive, and anti-freedom. Where did these similar and similarly-dysfunctional edits come from. Why are they so similar in far-apart countries? Did they all take their cue from the WHO? Who does the WHO take its cues from?

    “They” is whoever decides what is best. And what is best for whom.

    I am really trying to understand this, I mean I guess your answer would make more sense if you just said the Illuminati. 

    There have been similar issues in the past. During the 1918 Flu pandemic there were mask mandates. There were mandates to take the small pox vaccine. So I guess it matters what you think is “modern times” 

    The rich and power people in this county and the whole world, got together with the scientists and doctors to create a vaccine to kill off the extra people.  Then they took the vaccine themselves? 

     

    • #76
  17. Bishop Wash Member
    Bishop Wash
    @BishopWash

    Stina (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Killing I can understand. Control? Control to what end?

     

    I currently don’t think the vaccines are a killing program. I think the vaccine program as currently implemented is a cronyism play. I think whatever bad happens (if it happens) will be from hubris, not intent. I think they are losing control of the messaging (we aren’t as compliant right now) and that getting rid of a control group will help shore up the messaging around the vaccines.

    If a control group exists and does AT LEAST as well as the vaccinated, they lose control of the situation and the people start moving on.

    As to why control, the only thing I got that makes any human sense is pride, ego, and greed.

    Prime Minister Klain’s executive order has come out. No mention of natural immunity because it really isn’t about promoting the health and safety of the workforce regardless of this line, “I have determined that to promote the health and safety of the Federal workforce and the efficiency of the civil service, it is necessary to require COVID-19 vaccination for all Federal employees, subject to such exceptions as required by law.” Wonder what those exceptions are? It is about the control.

    The order only mentions three vaccines, “As of the date of this order, one of the COVID-19 vaccines, the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, also known as Comirnaty, has received approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and two others, the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine and the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine, have been authorized by the FDA for emergency use. The FDA has determined that all three vaccines meet its rigorous standards for safety, effectiveness, and manufacturing quality.”

     

    • #77
  18. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Stina (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Killing I can understand. Control? Control to what end?

     

    I currently don’t think the vaccines are a killing program. I think the vaccine program as currently implemented is a cronyism play. I think whatever bad happens (if it happens) will be from hubris, not intent. I think they are losing control of the messaging (we aren’t as compliant right now) and that getting rid of a control group will help shore up the messaging around the vaccines.

    If a control group exists and does AT LEAST as well as the vaccinated, they lose control of the situation and the people start moving on.

    As to why control, the only thing I got that makes any human sense is pride, ego, and greed.

    Not sure I can fully accept this but at least this answer makes sense to me. 

    • #78
  19. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Jager (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Jager (View Comment):

    Who are “they” trying to kill and who are “they”?

    96% of all doctors, all 9 supreme court justices, all 50 governors, every living President. Almost every member of Congress. About 60% of the eligible population. That is who is vaccinated in the US. “They” are trying to kill the rich and the poor, the conservatives and the liberals?

    “They”. Hmm. Who is they. To quote a quote from another OP today:

    Sowell’s concern should be the concern for all citizens of all countries everywhere,

    “The most basic question is not what is best but who shall decide what is best”

    There is a world-wide (at least in the English-speaking world) forced mask-wearing, forced travel limitation, forced vaccination process that is unprecedented in modern times, and perhaps of all time, that is counter-factual, societally destructive, and anti-freedom. Where did these similar and similarly-dysfunctional edits come from. Why are they so similar in far-apart countries? Did they all take their cue from the WHO? Who does the WHO take its cues from?

    “They” is whoever decides what is best. And what is best for whom.

    I am really trying to understand this, I mean I guess your answer would make more sense if you just said the Illuminati.

    There have been similar issues in the past. During the 1918 Flu pandemic there were mask mandates. There were mandates to take the small pox vaccine. So I guess it matters what you think is “modern times”

    The rich and power people in this county and the whole world, got together with the scientists and doctors to create a vaccine to kill off the extra people. Then they took the vaccine themselves?

    You believe in the Illuminati?  But seriously, I’m suggesting some body is making decisions that we are not privy to, and for their own purposes.  I tend to see vaccine mandates as at least (1) a money-making scheme, and (2) a plan to do away with the non-vaccinated control group by which efficacy and harm could be determined.  Why would any company be exempted from liability if there was no significant potential harm?  If there is significant harm, how would we make it impossible to determine what harm existed if everyone had the vaccine?

    Except for gross and callous misjudgment and ineptitude, none of this vaccine mandate makes sense.

    • #79
  20. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Except for gross and callous misjudgment and ineptitude, none of this vaccine mandate makes sense

    It makes a lot of sense, but it isn’t the right thing to do.

    • #80
  21. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Human beings whom I know personally and trust support vaccination. 

    Good enough for me. 

    • #81
  22. Taras Coolidge
    Taras
    @Taras

    @flicker — “Why would any company be exempted from liability if there was no significant potential harm?”

    Because there are significant potential lawsuits.

    If a vaccine saved a million lives but cost one, the family of the one could sue the vaccine maker into oblivion.  For that matter, with greedy lawyers and credulous juries, a vaccine maker could be destroyed even if its vaccine cost no lives.

    • #82
  23. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Taras (View Comment):

    @ flicker — “Why would any company be exempted from liability if there was no significant potential harm?”

    Because there are significant potential lawsuits.

    If a vaccine saved a million lives but cost one, the family of the one could sue the vaccine maker into oblivion. For that matter, with greedy lawyers and credulous juries, a vaccine maker could be destroyed even if its vaccine cost no lives.

    If this were a valid and true rationale, wouldn’t this have always been the case?  Wouldn’t pharmaceutical companies need complete liability protection in the future?  Wouldn’t all companies justly deserve liability protection?  Haven’t other non-pharmaceutical companies already had to close because of unjust law suits?

    • #83
  24. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    Taras (View Comment):

    @ flicker — “Why would any company be exempted from liability if there was no significant potential harm?”

    Because there are significant potential lawsuits.

    If a vaccine saved a million lives but cost one, the family of the one could sue the vaccine maker into oblivion. For that matter, with greedy lawyers and credulous juries, a vaccine maker could be destroyed even if its vaccine cost no lives.

    This is as convincing an argument to circumvent free market as anything related to free college.

    • #84
  25. Roderic Coolidge
    Roderic
    @rhfabian

    Stina (View Comment):
    I will stay so far away from the American modern health apparatus as is at all possible.

    Yeah, my wife had the same attitude.  He rejected conventional treatment for asthma and went with a low gluten diet and herbs.  She seemed to be doing OK for a while, but something triggered a severe attack one night.   She was turning blue, and I had to call in the EMS who hauled her off for a prolonged stay in the ICU.  

    That was some years ago now.  She still chaffs against modern medicine, but she will at least take the inhaled steroids, which is the only thing that consistently keeps her out of trouble. 

    • #85
  26. Roderic Coolidge
    Roderic
    @rhfabian

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Forgive me if this is a repeat, but I asked someone: In 12 words or less, why does the government want every single person vaccinated?

    The answer was: There are too many people and they want to kill them all off.

    The way it’s working out, the “best and brightest” get vaxxed, so they live.  The deplorables stew about conspiracies, don’t get vaxxed, and they die.

    And of course the efforts to convince people to get vaxxed are full of condescension, arrogance, insults, and threats.  Which just makes the deplorables dig their heels in by design.

    And who else is unlikely to get vaxxed?  African Americans!

    Basically, anyone who doesn’t trust the government because they’ve been screwed over by the government is more likely to die from COVID.

    It’s diabolical, I tell you.

    • #86
  27. Taras Coolidge
    Taras
    @Taras

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Taras (View Comment):

    @ flicker — “Why would any company be exempted from liability if there was no significant potential harm?”

    Because there are significant potential lawsuits.

    If a vaccine saved a million lives but cost one, the family of the one could sue the vaccine maker into oblivion. For that matter, with greedy lawyers and credulous juries, a vaccine maker could be destroyed even if its vaccine cost no lives.

    If this were a valid and true rationale, wouldn’t this have always been the case? Wouldn’t pharmaceutical companies need complete liability protection in the future? Wouldn’t all companies justly deserve liability protection? Haven’t other non-pharmaceutical companies already had to close because of unjust law suits?

    In olden times, we were less litigious than we are now. Partly, I think, because judges were likelier to exert their authority to throw out frivolous lawsuits and sanction the lawyers who brought them.

    The threat of lawsuits means that drugs that promise to be only marginally profitable are simply not developed any more.  The profit margin has to be big enough to cover potential lawsuits and idiot jury awards.

    In the case of vaccines specifically, lawsuits threatened to end all vaccine development in the United States.  This was finally enough to get Congress to act.

    • #87
  28. Taras Coolidge
    Taras
    @Taras

    Stina (View Comment):

    Taras (View Comment):

    @ flicker — “Why would any company be exempted from liability if there was no significant potential harm?”

    Because there are significant potential lawsuits.

    If a vaccine saved a million lives but cost one, the family of the one could sue the vaccine maker into oblivion. For that matter, with greedy lawyers and credulous juries, a vaccine maker could be destroyed even if its vaccine cost no lives.

    This is as convincing an argument to circumvent free market as anything related to free college.

    Actually the lawsuits circumvent the free market.  

    Our paternalistic government doesn’t let us choose to take a vaccine at our own risk, to opt out of future lawsuits.  

    For example, the Moderna vaccine was actually available in March 2020, but unless you were part of the clinical trial, there was no way to get it — no matter how much danger you were in.  

    • #88
  29. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    Taras (View Comment):

    Actually the lawsuits circumvent the free market.  

    Our paternalistic government doesn’t let us choose to take a vaccine at our own risk, to opt out of future lawsuits.  

    For example, the Moderna vaccine was actually available in March 2020, but unless you were part of the clinical trial, there was no way to get it — no matter how much danger you were in.  

    There is no consumer protection anywhere in this chain.

    It is fascist governing. Privatized profit with Public risk and absolutely no ability to recoup damages to the individual or the public at large.

    They could be literally poisoning us and there would be nothing we can do to stop it.

    That is why conservatives obstensibly agitate for free market. If someone puts out a bad product, the market can decide not to use it. 

    There is no principled position for this.

    There is an argument that we should have reformed medical litigation, but preventing consumers from seeking remedy for negative results, ESPECIALLY when they are FORCED into it, is not ethical or moral and absolutely should not be legal.

    • #89
  30. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Stina (View Comment):

    Taras (View Comment):

    Actually the lawsuits circumvent the free market.

    Our paternalistic government doesn’t let us choose to take a vaccine at our own risk, to opt out of future lawsuits.

    For example, the Moderna vaccine was actually available in March 2020, but unless you were part of the clinical trial, there was no way to get it — no matter how much danger you were in.

    There is no consumer protection anywhere in this chain.

    It is fascist governing. Privatized profit with Public risk and absolutely no ability to recoup damages to the individual or the public at large.

    They could be literally poisoning us and there would be nothing we can do to stop it.

    That is why conservatives obstensibly agitate for free market. If someone puts out a bad product, the market can decide not to use it.

    There is no principled position for this.

    There is an argument that we should have reformed medical litigation, but preventing consumers from seeking remedy for negative results, ESPECIALLY when they are FORCED into it, is not ethical or moral and absolutely should not be legal.

    So the Federal Government designated this as a Pandemic. The Federal Government under Trump and operation Warp Speed fast tracked the vaccines. Now the Federal Government is mandating the use of this medicine. This transfers the liability for the product from the Pharmaceutical Company to the Federal Government. This means that individuals go to the Feds for compensation. The Federal Government , like it could for most things, can go after the Pharmaceutical Company for any negligence (knowingly putting out a bad product)

    Injuries from the COVID vaccine are covered under the PREP ACT, claims are filed with the CICP program within the DHHS. The claims are evaluated and adjudicated by the Department. I believe that like any Administrative Law decision a bad result may be Appealed to Federal Court. 

    https://www.hrsa.gov/cicp 

    https://www.phe.gov/Preparedness/legal/prepact/Pages/default.aspx

    https://www.hrsa.gov/cicp/faq

    You can even find a listing of claims that have been filed in reaction to COVID both for potential treatments and for Vaccines. 

    https://www.hrsa.gov/cicp/cicp-data#table-1

    On note there are actually more claims for injury or death on file for the Treatment of Covid than for the Vaccine. 

     

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.