Response to recent editorial I realize that an editorial article is not required to be factual, nor to necessarily impart useful information, but the recent editorial “Viewpoint: You Might as well Know, It Isn’t Always So” was so filled with disinformation that I could not let it stand without some attention to corrections. The opening statement about a hand-written sign is interesting, but then the details are all terribly misleading, and do not represent the considered opinion of thoughtful persons, yet each of the bullet points represent a serious threat to our world, though the timing stated is without basis. As an example, have you seen the data about the loss of polar ice? There is little doubt this is real, and a threat to our climate.
What is the relationship between each of these events and our taxes increasing? Perhaps you should cite evidence that there is (or is not) a clear relationship.
With regard to your primary care physician’s recommendation for a shingles vaccination, he or she was providing the best advice for any adult over the age of 50. Your cited example of a single case (your wife’s experience avoiding the potential long-term effects of shingles) is hardly the kind of evidence one should use to make healthcare decisions. I could cite many examples of family and friends who did not have the nice outcome that your wife experienced, but better yet, I do understand that the current shingles vaccine is about 90% effective in preventing what can be a very significant acute and chronic illness.
Similarly, you cited a single study of the outcome of COVID19 vaccination with the implication (though not clearly stated) that the vaccination led to death some “73.9% “of the time. The study you cited, and which it seems you did not fully read and understand, was a meta-analysis of many studies around the world in which the majority of reports included a single case, based on patients who were thought perhaps to have died of complications of COVID-19 vaccination within a short time (generally less than 15 days) after their vaccination. There were a total of 325 autopsies done primarily to de- termine potential relationship to COVID-19 vaccination included in the study, of which 73.9% had pathologic findings which could have been caused by the vaccine, or may well have been unrelated. The paper did not establish that the vaccine caused the deaths, but rather “suggests there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death.” Since approximately 1 billion persons have received at least one dose of the vaccine, if we were to expect that 73.9% of them would die from the vaccine, we would have depleted the world population by another 740 million persons, which clearly did not happen. The number of people around the world who have died of COVID infections as of the time of the preparation of the report was 6,938,353, which represents a roughly 10% mortality rate among persons known to be infected.
Yes, some media sources have sensationalized many of the threats to our health and wellbeing. I just would prefer that our local newspaper not be amongst those that created disinformation and misled the local readers.
