It looks as if that yes, white people are more impacted, but, and it's a big but, that doesn't really tell us anything about who is most impacted by the vaccine. V-safe is voluntary, so this is no doubt a biased sample, and I would be extremely surprised if that isn't the prime reason for the discrepancy. Guessing black people are less likely to sign up etc... we can't really make generalizations like that from this data. Same goes for gender. It could easily just be that women are more likely to sign up for v-safe. Not sure ICAN has released the files they used to make the dashboard, but it would be interesting to see what kind of trends emerge.
I interpreted that as being a higher proportion of white people signed up for the V-Safe app. It would be interesting to know if that was a correct assumption.
Yes but be careful for bias from this number as it is not likely a representative sample of all those who took the vaccination. It's also unclear what direction the bias is in but the chance of injury is likely less than that because some baseline needs to be assumed. Still, it's pretty clear there are all kinds of safety signals here and the vaccine would have had its EUA rescinded (followed by a thorough investigation) a long time ago if not for regulatory capture. Many public health officials were arguing that the chance of seeking medical treatment after vaccination was essentially 10000 to 100000 times less than the vsafe data. There is no realistic way for that to be true.
Analysis of the answers to the "multiple choice" questions from the v-safe app will be very helpful. However, ICAN is still litigating to get the free-form comments, which might be a lot more revealing and significantly more impactful.
Am I interpreting that right, more than 2.7 million white people impacted, with next closest race 200K?
I recall reading a year ago that the vaccine injuries seem to select for whites of European decent...
It looks as if that yes, white people are more impacted, but, and it's a big but, that doesn't really tell us anything about who is most impacted by the vaccine. V-safe is voluntary, so this is no doubt a biased sample, and I would be extremely surprised if that isn't the prime reason for the discrepancy. Guessing black people are less likely to sign up etc... we can't really make generalizations like that from this data. Same goes for gender. It could easily just be that women are more likely to sign up for v-safe. Not sure ICAN has released the files they used to make the dashboard, but it would be interesting to see what kind of trends emerge.
I interpreted that as being a higher proportion of white people signed up for the V-Safe app. It would be interesting to know if that was a correct assumption.
Am I reading this right - 8% required medical care after vaccination? That's huge if correct.
Yes but be careful for bias from this number as it is not likely a representative sample of all those who took the vaccination. It's also unclear what direction the bias is in but the chance of injury is likely less than that because some baseline needs to be assumed. Still, it's pretty clear there are all kinds of safety signals here and the vaccine would have had its EUA rescinded (followed by a thorough investigation) a long time ago if not for regulatory capture. Many public health officials were arguing that the chance of seeking medical treatment after vaccination was essentially 10000 to 100000 times less than the vsafe data. There is no realistic way for that to be true.
Analysis of the answers to the "multiple choice" questions from the v-safe app will be very helpful. However, ICAN is still litigating to get the free-form comments, which might be a lot more revealing and significantly more impactful.
Thanks for sharing.