“There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call a pandemic when a man takes the global media industrial complex for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody’s expense but his own. However, nothing dispirits, and nothing seems worth while disputing. He bolts down all events, all creeds, and beliefs, and persuasions, all hard things visible and invisible, never mind how knobby; as an ostrich of potent digestion gobbles down bullets and gun flints. And as for small difficulties and worryings, prospects of sudden disaster, peril of life and limb; all these, and death itself, seem to him only sly, good-natured hits, and jolly punches in the side bestowed by the unseen and unaccountable old joker. That odd sort of wayward mood I am speaking of, comes over a man only in some time of extreme tribulation; it comes in the very midst of his earnestness, so that what just before might have seemed to him a thing most momentous, now seems but a part of the general joke.”
Thanks much for this, I did not have time to look at that study. I can't believe they didn't even consider serious adverse events. Though I suppose those could never be attributed to the "placebo effect" because they would be for example in one's echocardiogram. So this was all complete mendacity on the part of the media, to make it sounds like serious reported side effects were imaginary.
I feel a little like this confuses the article. They are claiming that the nocebo effect is similar to the placebo effect, but for the comparator arm. Basically, people are expecting adverse effects to happen, so they get a headache or whatever after they get the vaccine.
Which of course is silly, because if that were the case, both the placebo and vaccine arms would have the same rate of events. There is literally no reason why we would see this so-called nocebo effect occur at a higher rate than the placebo effect.
What exactly does the "76%" number mean anyway? Is it saying that the placebo "caused" 76% as many "adverse reactions" as the real thing, therefore maybe that many of the jab reactions are "in their head"? If that's what they're saying, then a more honest way of putting it would be that "there is a ~33% greater chance of minor adverse events in the jab compared to the placebo".
I had the same thoughts when I looked at that study. Bullshit. And now if you haven't heard, Go Fund Me has cancelled the truck convoy's fund that had $10 million in it. People only have two weeks to request a refund or they will keep the money and distribute where they want. And now the convoy organizers have been charged in a $10 million class action lawsuit that will be heard tomorrow at 2 p.m.
This feels like there is no hope. They have the resources to stop every reasonable action. If someone actually came up with this whole nocebo bullshit and thought "Yep, that'll fly" they really do think we are morons.
It annoys me when people use the minor side effects as a reason to mock people for not getting vaccinated. " It's just a scratch, I barely felt anything, it was over in 3 seconds, what's your problem".
What’s your take on these vitamin D studies that somehow took two years to come out due to the extreme caution that had to be taken in studying safe, cheap preventative OTC treatments: https://apple.news/AARC07w12Sx-o5p9pa2vz1A
Thank you for explaining how these researchers were able to come up with that crazy number! For those readers who, like me, need the AE Tables for Dummies version, the "Cormirnaty" package insert is now available at https://www.fda.gov/media/151707/download. Starting on p. 10 you can view the tables of all the "solicited" AEs in a format that makes it apparent even to the less mathematically inclined just how biased this study design was from the get-go. Surely the researchers did not coincidentally choose the events that would just happen to have the biggest numbers in the placebo group.
(As a sidenote, that you write "the media completely lack even basic analytical skills" demonstrates a great deal of generosity on your part. The list of what they are lacking could be read as a eulogy to journalism, if journalism weren't alive and well here on Substack and in the hands of citizens who-- for now-- are still able to go directly to the studies and skip the news propaganda altogether.)
Thanks much for this, I did not have time to look at that study. I can't believe they didn't even consider serious adverse events. Though I suppose those could never be attributed to the "placebo effect" because they would be for example in one's echocardiogram. So this was all complete mendacity on the part of the media, to make it sounds like serious reported side effects were imaginary.
I feel a little like this confuses the article. They are claiming that the nocebo effect is similar to the placebo effect, but for the comparator arm. Basically, people are expecting adverse effects to happen, so they get a headache or whatever after they get the vaccine.
Which of course is silly, because if that were the case, both the placebo and vaccine arms would have the same rate of events. There is literally no reason why we would see this so-called nocebo effect occur at a higher rate than the placebo effect.
What exactly does the "76%" number mean anyway? Is it saying that the placebo "caused" 76% as many "adverse reactions" as the real thing, therefore maybe that many of the jab reactions are "in their head"? If that's what they're saying, then a more honest way of putting it would be that "there is a ~33% greater chance of minor adverse events in the jab compared to the placebo".
I had the same thoughts when I looked at that study. Bullshit. And now if you haven't heard, Go Fund Me has cancelled the truck convoy's fund that had $10 million in it. People only have two weeks to request a refund or they will keep the money and distribute where they want. And now the convoy organizers have been charged in a $10 million class action lawsuit that will be heard tomorrow at 2 p.m.
This feels like there is no hope. They have the resources to stop every reasonable action. If someone actually came up with this whole nocebo bullshit and thought "Yep, that'll fly" they really do think we are morons.
It annoys me when people use the minor side effects as a reason to mock people for not getting vaccinated. " It's just a scratch, I barely felt anything, it was over in 3 seconds, what's your problem".
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/
Interesting how we aren’t really made aware what the placebo actually is.
What’s your take on these vitamin D studies that somehow took two years to come out due to the extreme caution that had to be taken in studying safe, cheap preventative OTC treatments: https://apple.news/AARC07w12Sx-o5p9pa2vz1A
Thank you for explaining how these researchers were able to come up with that crazy number! For those readers who, like me, need the AE Tables for Dummies version, the "Cormirnaty" package insert is now available at https://www.fda.gov/media/151707/download. Starting on p. 10 you can view the tables of all the "solicited" AEs in a format that makes it apparent even to the less mathematically inclined just how biased this study design was from the get-go. Surely the researchers did not coincidentally choose the events that would just happen to have the biggest numbers in the placebo group.
(As a sidenote, that you write "the media completely lack even basic analytical skills" demonstrates a great deal of generosity on your part. The list of what they are lacking could be read as a eulogy to journalism, if journalism weren't alive and well here on Substack and in the hands of citizens who-- for now-- are still able to go directly to the studies and skip the news propaganda altogether.)