Has anyone seen the 1,000 peer reviewed medical papers about vaccine injuries.

[sassandfaff]

community.covidvaccineinjuries.com/compilation-peer-reviewed-medical-papers-of-covid-vaccine-injuries/

Would this influence anyone from getting the next booster?

As someone who involved in publishing in and peer-reviewing research from highly regarded journals, I wouldn’t look at this list. I’d want to see the impact factor associated with the journal and a meta analysis. There is some truly shit research out there, and I wouldn’t bother reading unless from reputable journals. It’s impressive someone has complied 1000 articles, but they need go further and provide more contextual info.

Gold standard research doesn’t refer to particular researchers (although you always have to be aware of bias), but how it is carried out. It would need a large sample size with blind/double blind randomisation across a number of different care centres. Think thousands of people recruited to a study where researchers and participants arent aware of who has been randomised to receive a vaccine or placebo across a number of number of surgeries or hospitals. Participants would be followed up over a period of time to monitor short/long term effects. This would be after the study has been put through rigorous ethics approval and phase 1 and 2 trials with smaller sample sizes. Treatment decisions based on the results of these studies are credible. Making a decision about a treatment based on a series of a single case studies would not be wise

I sympathise with you on the nerve pain! I was fit and healthy 18 months ago, no health conditions and regularly running and swimming. Now I use a zimmer frame to get around the house and I had to give up my job. I still feel like it's all a bad dream.

I also have no problem with anyone who wants to have the vaccine. But any papers written on the subject are inaccurate if those of us declaring adverse effects are being shut down, because we're not being used in those statistics.

No, I will have the next booster this autumn, when my group is called.

I'm clinically vulnerable to covid and the first time I had it I ended up in hospital with a potential life threatening complication, it has led to a life long health issue which requires daily medication. Second time was much better but I had access to anti virals by day 5.

I have had no issues with the vaccines I have had, other than a sore arm really, so I will have the next covid booster, along with my flu vaccine, later this year.

I clicked on one study and read the summary.
It stated that 15 people had been hospitalised with complications. What it didn't say was how many people had received the vaccine and what % the 15 people was.
Statistics can be presented in many ways, and the vast, overwhelmingly majority of people don't suffer complications. So I will most likely take a booster if offered another.

I also have no problem with anyone who wants to have the vaccine. But any papers written on the subject are inaccurate if those of us declaring adverse effects are being shut down, because we're not being used in those statistics

how do you know? Are you reading all the papers?

a quick google shows there’s several papers
published on nerve pain and neuro issues post vaccine.

if you don’t think your clinician is taking you seriously you can report via the yellow card
scheme.

do you think the yellow card scheme is deliberately excluding reports? Because that isn’t how it works.

I have just read one - No. 60, New England Journal of Medicine.

It states that the risk of myocarditis after vaccination is 3 in 100,000, while the risk for myocarditis after COVID infection is 11 in 100,000.

So yes, there is a risk from vaccination, but a bigger one without vaccination. I suspect most of the papers say this or similar.

I won't be or the flu jab, nothing to do with the papers just feel it is not necessary, since this is the covid board though I would expect most on it to have their booster

Not a hope of me getting it.

My cousin for example - 38 found dead in bed - heart attack.

I've had two but will probably not get anymore.

*It states that the risk of myocarditis after vaccination is 3 in 100,000, while the risk for myocarditis after COVID infection is 11 in 100,000.

So yes, there is a risk from vaccination, but a bigger one without vaccination. I suspect most of the papers say this or similar.*

I don't think you can directly compare statistics like that. Not everyone will catch covid every year. Your risk might be 3 in 100 000 from the vax, but you may not catch covid at all even if you don't have the vax.

@ByTheGrace - they estimate over 70% of the UK population has had Covid by this point so even taking that into account your chances with the vaccine are still better.

I'm CEV for Covid. I've had my 4th booster and looking forward to the 5th.

Not feeling inclined to read a load of spurious "research". I do trust the advice of my consultants though.

I do think there should be more transparency so people can make informed decisions for themselves. For example a young man with no underlying conditions might be less keen as the risk of the jab is possibly more than the risk of covid. For someone in their 70s with a myriad of underlying conditions the opposite is true. It isn't so linear as vaccines are bad or everyone is safer with a vaccine, but often any sort of highlight of risk is met with chimes of anti vaxx rubbish when it isn't.

Personally I won't be getting a 4th jab. Happily had the 3 but have had covid twice since and for me personally I don't feel they'll be a benefit in a 4th unless the formulation is being updated substantially.

@ChilliBandit

But would 70% of the population be getting infected 3 or 4 times a year, or even yearly if this is how regular boosters are going to be?
I'm not an antivaxxer, just not sure if statistics can be interpreted this way.

How did you book it - are you in the group who also had the April booster?

Asking because I’ll be getting the Autumn one (over 50) but haven’t heard anything yet.

The article/website wouldn’t put me off having the boosters. The fact that my periods have gone nuts since having the last lot of vaccines would.

Given the enormous barrier to many people actually engaging meaningfully with the research (as this thread shows), what more can health authorities and individual doctors do than try to make recommendations based on their (ongoing) review of the evidence. Individual doctors can help translate key research to aid individual decision making but, at some point, people are going to need to just accept that the medical profession has actual expertise (and no one is trying to harm them!)

people put more trust in the dodgy takeaway they use at 3am (where, actually, scrutiny of the many processes and the provenance of the food may be merited!) than they do in well evidenced medical research.

we defer to peoples expertise and guidance in all sorts of ways. You don’t find anti civil engineering websites with lists of papers about the tensile strength of different materials and people shouting about how they need to make informed decisions before they cross a bridge. But there’s still been a lot of decision making gone into the design and construction of that bridge on behalf of the users.

personally I don't feel they'll be a benefit in a 4th unless the formulation is being updated substantially

what do you class as “updated substantially”? Do you know enough about vaccine formulation to know what the difference is?

the boosters every year will be the same as the flu vaccine, tweaked to deal with that years dominant variant. We’ve seen how the virus evolves- this is why people are still getting it, much in the way you never become immune to the flu, despite the yearly booster.

@ByTheGrace but the vaccines don’t work in a vacuum either, if you’ve already had 3 with only mild side effects, it would follow that your chance of reacting to a 4th would be the same. I do understand those that are saying I won’t be taking another because XYZ happened to me with the others but the OP is specifically trying to put people off with irrelevant studies.

That would be The Cochrane Library.

Note how far away from a list of papers that someone thinks might ‘back up’ their argument this is.

You know most of these cases of myocarditis make a complete recovery? I know it sounds awful but there’s no long term damage generally.

I have asked this question before on a previous thread and still unable to find the answers - probably not looking in the right place though!
So I’m struggling to find the information required before I book the 2nd booster.
So far I have had the x 2 Pfizer and x 1 Pfizer booster. Age 50+ so eligible for another booster. No problems beyond the normal arm ache and slight temperature.
However, does the 2nd booster stop infection/transmission for a limited amount of time (2-3 months?) and for what % of people having the booster? Meanwhile does your inherent T cell immunity remain constant (preventing severe disease) from the previous 2 plus booster? If so, does this indicate the 2nd booster has a limited time span for infection/transmission but protection against severe disease would hold without needing the booster? If anyone can point me in the right direction for this data I would really appreciate that as I cannot find anywhere.