Hacker News Reader

Comment by antibuddy | Hacker News Reader

"You also seem to misunderstand the mechanism of action of the various vaccines."

> I did not say anything about the mechanism.

"Linking to the top level of VAERs and claiming it says something it doesn't is the issue."

> That is not what you said tho. You said I spread misinformation. I did point to top level because the links to the actual query are not working after a few days. Just query it for COVID-19 vaccines and sort it by events reported or pick death as symptom beforehand.

Result: 3.5% dead. There is no distinction made if it is coincidence (which is not made with COVID-19 as well) and it's not representative, given that elderly are vaccinated first. Average age of vaccination is 50 years afaik. It's even a pretty high lethality compared to COVID-19 lethality for an average age of 80 btw.

View on HN

More than 90 million people have been administered the vaccines.

You are using the wrong denominator.

Deaths reported as adverse events aren't necessarily due to the vaccine (they may be reported simply because they happen after administration of the vaccine).

The vaccines do not gene edit (this is what 'gene therapy' implies).

Like I said, you are confused in multiple ways and should stop.

"You are using the wrong denominator."

> I did not use a denominator. It was the CDC. Do you have a problem with their methodology?

"Deaths reported as adverse events aren't necessarily due to the vaccine (they may be reported simply because they happen after administration of the vaccine)."

> You repeated what I said, but omitted a part. This distinction is not made (and cannot be made most of the time) with COVID-19. It's therefore an equivalent comparison. Well, as long as you compare it to mortality rate on population rather than infected that is (0.23% is for infected).

"The vaccines do not gene edit (this is what 'gene therapy' implies)."

> I'm not even sure why you are so annoyed by gene therapy. It plays no part in my argument. If you don't like gene therapy, then call it new vaccination method X. It's weird how people are alarmed by the moniker "gene therapy", but do it anyway if you don't call it like that.

"Like I said, you are confused in multiple ways and should stop. "

> You said I spread misinformation while using CDC and WHO. That was clearly not correct. Direct your anger at my argument and not at me please; maybe you see the futility of your anger then.

You, with no acknowledgement, edited the worst of it out of your initial comment!

My goodness.

What are you talking about? It sounds to me like you are out of arguments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com