Study shows psychosis linked to COVID vax

[braalian]

Funny, I’ve gotten all the vaccines and all the boosters and I’ve given dozens of shots and hundreds of coworkers have gotten the shot and I’ve seen nothing remotely like this

 

[Vrenn]

Funny, I’ve gotten all the vaccines and all the boosters and I’ve given dozens of shots and hundreds of coworkers have gotten the shot and I’ve seen nothing remotely like this

I am growing extreme hair during a full moon, growing a long snout with really big and nasty teeth and craving a heated date with the Gov of S.D. Of course, the shots have nothing to do with this medical problem and the VA says I can be cured by barking at Gov of SD.

 

[odanny]

Funny, I’ve gotten all the vaccines and all the boosters and I’ve given dozens of shots and hundreds of coworkers have gotten the shot and I’ve seen nothing remotely like this

I’m shocked, shocked I tell ya!

 

[braalian]

I’m shocked, shocked I tell ya!

Funny how the people who actually WORK in healthcare and administer vaccines and care for the patients before and after never mention seeing all of these unprecedented reactions

It’s almost as if the only ones blathering on about it are uneducated rubes who get their info from Facebook reposts

 

[luiza]

Funny how the people who actually WORK in healthcare and administer vaccines and care for the patients before and after never mention seeing all of these unprecedented reactions

It’s almost as if the only ones blathering on about it are uneducated rubes who get their info from Facebook reposts

Many of them are dead .

Clearly you suffered eye sight problems as a result of your Killer Shots and you cannot even see injuries that research workers can .
And once those lovely Spike Proteins go through the blood -brain barrier , anything goes . As you realise .

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Funny, I’ve gotten all the vaccines and all the boosters and I’ve given dozens of shots and hundreds of coworkers have gotten the shot and I’ve seen nothing remotely like this

well, with a one in 25,541,666 shots given chance, not a surprise

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Funny how the people who actually WORK in healthcare and administer vaccines and care for the patients before and after never mention seeing all of these unprecedented reactions

It’s almost as if the only ones blathering on about it are uneducated rubes who get their info from Facebook reposts

The story line is that you all are bought off.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

The story line is that you all are bought off.

All 12 million of them?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

All 12 million of them?

I have been told on this very forum that my wife, the ICU nurse has been

 

[braalian]

All 12 million of them?

Apparently the “deep state” has infinite resources

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Apparently the “deep state” has infinite resources

Wow!

 

[gipper]

So many bought the lies of big pharma, government, and the corporate controlled media. Not me!

 

[ninja007]

613 million doses administered, 24 cases of new-onset psychotic symptoms.

That is one incident of it happening for every 25,541,666 shots given.

Or a 0.000003915171% chance of it happening.

thats about the same percentage of a healthy person dying from convid but most got several jabs.

 

[ninja007]

the fact that the gov., the rich, gates etc never touched the jab tells you all you need to know.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Your site is mediafactchecked as mostly truthful. This ain't one of those times.

You forgot the link backing up your claim.

Or did you mean to think we'd trust a liar like you ?

 

[HikerGuy83]

613 million doses administered, 24 cases of new-onset psychotic symptoms.

That is one incident of it happening for every 25,541,666 shots given.

Or a 0.000003915171% chance of it happening.

I didn't read that. Can you point out where it said that this was a survey of everyone who was vaccinated ?

Your math would be correct, unless the sample size is a bit smaller, which the article seems to suggest it is.

The article also isn't saying anything bad about vaccines. It is saying a little more research might be useful.

Of course, it seems that like everyone else on the board you are want to show you can do math.

Feel better ?

Looking forward to that clarrification.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I didn't read that. Can you point out where it said that this was a survey of everyone who was vaccinated ?

Your math would be correct, unless the sample size is a bit smaller, which the article seems to suggest it is.

The article also isn't saying anything bad about vaccines. It is saying a little more research might be useful.

Of course, it seems that like everyone else on the board you are want to show you can do math.

Feel better ?

Looking forward to that clarrification.

Does the study suggest that? They looked for case reports and case series on new-onset psychosis following COVID-19 vaccination from December 1st, 2019, to November 21st, 2023. They found 21 articles that described 24 cases. The timeframe would cover just about everyone who was vaccinated.

I am sorry that my math triggered or confused you, I can lay out each step of how I came up with the number if it would help, just let me know.

 

[sparky]

Funny how the people who actually WORK in healthcare and administer vaccines and care for the patients before and after never mention seeing all of these unprecedented reactions

I was in 3 decades should you really want to go down that road braal......

~S~

 

[HikerGuy83]

Does the study suggest that? They looked for case reports and case series on new-onset psychosis following COVID-19 vaccination from December 1st, 2019, to November 21st, 2023. They found 21 articles that described 24 cases. The timeframe would cover just about everyone who was vaccinated.

I am sorry that my math triggered or confused you, I can lay out each step of how I came up with the number if it would help, just let me know.

Oh, I get your math....and it was correct.

I was just asking about the sample size. The timeframe means nothing. It's the scope of what was reviewed.

I think you are just taking to much for granted. The silly small number of cases relative to the total vaccinations would suggest they should not have said anything at all.

There are probably that many cases in a smaller sample size of people in general (vaxxed or not).

But, I guess if you need to get and tout vaccines, you do what you have to.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I was just asking about the sample size. The timeframe means nothing. It's the scope of what was reviewed.

I think you are just taking to much for granted. The silly small number of cases relative to the total vaccinations would suggest they should not have said anything at all.

Once again, if you would actually open the link in the OP and read it, you would see what they did. But let me help you out...


For the review, the following databases for relevant English language literature were searched: PubMed, MEDLINE, ClinicalKey, and ScienceDirect. Studies were restricted to those published from December 1st, 2019 (the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak) to November 21st, 2023.

So, their sample was every case/study reported in any of those databases.

There are probably that many cases in a smaller sample size of people in general (vaxxed or not).

How does a search of all those databases lead to a "smaller sample size"?

But, I guess if you need to get and tout vaccines, you do what you have to.

I do not give a shit about the vaccines, just shoddy statistics work.