I thought that was the most likely potential explanation at first but the guy who originally posted this says he already ruled out that explanation because he only looked at the serious adverse reaction data and he claims there is no major political state by state difference when it comes to the mandatory reporting of these severe reactions by doctors.
The guy who originally posted this has a different hypothesis on what is happening.
He thinks atleast 8 percent of people got saline instead of the vax in those Atlantic coastal states.
His rationale is that some of the most powerful people in America reside in those coastal Atlantic states.
You know I love a good conspiracy, but this one doesn't pass the test.
There isn't a difference in reporting requirements but it's the same as gender discrimination covering discrimination against men. Yes, but actually no. The words on paper say one thing but the actual practice is another.
If they were going to give powerful people saline, they'd just give the powerful people saline.
You also need to see if there's a difference in the vaccination rate and population of under 30 year old males, because they have the most risk of serious reaction.
Massachusetts old money bluebloods that vacation in Bar Harbour?
Secret way to make sure they have a "control" population of people who think they're vaxed but really only got liquid Placebo? To compare with those who admit to be totally unvaxxed? (ie, a way to study the "Placebo effect". And yes, Placebo is actually the trade name for sugar pills, and is even listed in the "big blue book of drugs" that doctors duck out on you to look at when they need to prescribe you for something weird.)
Placebo (from Latin: "I shall please") is the generic name. Brand name was "Cebocap". Fancy looking capsuiles, one side blue, the other side clear, with lots of little dots inside. Active ingredients, per the manufacturer, were sugar and starch.
I had a patient taking those once, back when I was an intern. Doctor had told her it was a narcotic, and she not only had relief of her pain from them, she didn't even have withdrawal symptoms after taking massive amounts of Vicodin for long enough to have been well and truly hooked. We had to be very careful what we said to this patient. That kinda thing would never fly today when you can look things up instantly on your phone, but back in the 90s you could get away with more.
Minnesota is definitely not a red state. Contrary to popular belief, it's one of the bluest states in the union. It might even be more of a Democrat stronghold than New York. Minnesotans are who kicked off the summer of George.
Bad batches are the most likely explanation for the states with injury rates off the chart. Other possibility is some local phenomenon in those states to encourage more vax injuries reports. Another possibility is these states used one particular vax manufacturer more than other states.
VT/MA/CT/ME/RI is a different story and I have no explanation. Honestly, the theory that some people in these states didn't actually get the vax, despite claiming they did, is the best I can come up with as well. Only other possibility I can think of is one particular vax manufacturer is more or less common in those states? The obvious physical proximity of these states surely means something, but what?
This 100% cannot be explained by just politics/differential reporting. Plenty of super blue states in the west. Would also expect overreporting of vax injuries from super red states which we don't see.
This also can't be explained by demographics, as while VT/ME are white, MA/CT aren't, and there are plenty of very white states in the west that didn't have similar outcomes.
The logistics of creating a "more dangerous" version and shipping it only to certain states is impractical outside of movies.
Not only is there political persuasions of drs and their subsequent reporting rates, Aka left leaning drs not reporting, there's also the patients. You think a california single mum is going to take her 5 year old transgender kid to hospital because of chest pains after a shot? no that's just anxiety sweety, you're just scared of transphobes and it's triggering your anxiety.
VAERS is not exactly a good measure, as it's both underinclusive (not everything is reported) and overinclusive (tons of stuff is reported when there is just correlation and causation).
I think this can be explained by politics.
The states where the vax is God will chalk it up to literally anything else, while red states will report fairly.
I thought that was the most likely potential explanation at first but the guy who originally posted this says he already ruled out that explanation because he only looked at the serious adverse reaction data and he claims there is no major political state by state difference when it comes to the mandatory reporting of these severe reactions by doctors.
The guy who originally posted this has a different hypothesis on what is happening.
He thinks atleast 8 percent of people got saline instead of the vax in those Atlantic coastal states.
His rationale is that some of the most powerful people in America reside in those coastal Atlantic states.
Hard for me to say which explanation is reality.
You know I love a good conspiracy, but this one doesn't pass the test.
There isn't a difference in reporting requirements but it's the same as gender discrimination covering discrimination against men. Yes, but actually no. The words on paper say one thing but the actual practice is another.
If they were going to give powerful people saline, they'd just give the powerful people saline.
You also need to see if there's a difference in the vaccination rate and population of under 30 year old males, because they have the most risk of serious reaction.
Massachusetts old money bluebloods that vacation in Bar Harbour?
Secret way to make sure they have a "control" population of people who think they're vaxed but really only got liquid Placebo? To compare with those who admit to be totally unvaxxed? (ie, a way to study the "Placebo effect". And yes, Placebo is actually the trade name for sugar pills, and is even listed in the "big blue book of drugs" that doctors duck out on you to look at when they need to prescribe you for something weird.)
Placebo (from Latin: "I shall please") is the generic name. Brand name was "Cebocap". Fancy looking capsuiles, one side blue, the other side clear, with lots of little dots inside. Active ingredients, per the manufacturer, were sugar and starch.
I had a patient taking those once, back when I was an intern. Doctor had told her it was a narcotic, and she not only had relief of her pain from them, she didn't even have withdrawal symptoms after taking massive amounts of Vicodin for long enough to have been well and truly hooked. We had to be very careful what we said to this patient. That kinda thing would never fly today when you can look things up instantly on your phone, but back in the 90s you could get away with more.
Someone said something.
Minnesota is definitely not a red state. Contrary to popular belief, it's one of the bluest states in the union. It might even be more of a Democrat stronghold than New York. Minnesotans are who kicked off the summer of George.
Bad batches are the most likely explanation for the states with injury rates off the chart. Other possibility is some local phenomenon in those states to encourage more vax injuries reports. Another possibility is these states used one particular vax manufacturer more than other states.
VT/MA/CT/ME/RI is a different story and I have no explanation. Honestly, the theory that some people in these states didn't actually get the vax, despite claiming they did, is the best I can come up with as well. Only other possibility I can think of is one particular vax manufacturer is more or less common in those states? The obvious physical proximity of these states surely means something, but what?
This 100% cannot be explained by just politics/differential reporting. Plenty of super blue states in the west. Would also expect overreporting of vax injuries from super red states which we don't see.
This also can't be explained by demographics, as while VT/ME are white, MA/CT aren't, and there are plenty of very white states in the west that didn't have similar outcomes.
I think maybe it is more lib doctors who believe 'vacc cant harm' and or they are owned by same hospital systems
There's been some theorising in Denmark and Sweden that some batches were bad or just worse than average.
If one state got predominantly a bad batch, their stats would be worse than one that happened to get a good batch.
The logistics of creating a "more dangerous" version and shipping it only to certain states is impractical outside of movies.
Not only is there political persuasions of drs and their subsequent reporting rates, Aka left leaning drs not reporting, there's also the patients. You think a california single mum is going to take her 5 year old transgender kid to hospital because of chest pains after a shot? no that's just anxiety sweety, you're just scared of transphobes and it's triggering your anxiety.
You know the guy is a whackjob, right?
Analysis aside, is the data accurate? Trump told me there are no high rates of adverse reactions.
Depends on how you define 'high'.
VAERS is not exactly a good measure, as it's both underinclusive (not everything is reported) and overinclusive (tons of stuff is reported when there is just correlation and causation).
Its true that Vaers is not all knowing. I prefer to get my science updates from trusted experts on CNN