Have you had "the jab"? Tell us your symptoms

... and yes based on this thread alone, I think the results are pretty conclusive that the vaccinations do cause a reaction that is not just in someone's head.

The majority of the PropertyChat population does not fit the criteria you listed above.

People on PropertyChat are well educated, healthy and well travelled - and as such the majority would have had plenty of vaccines in their lifetime and so understand what is a normal reaction to an injection and what is not.

FYI - here is a link to the actual study: Frequency of Adverse Events in the Placebo Arms of COVID-19 Vaccine Trials

They performed a meta-analysis of multiple studies where people were given a placebo injection vs an actual vaccine dose.

They then went on to compare the number of people reporting an adverse event (AE) from the placebo injections vs the vaccines.

They then make the assertion that because people in the placebo group reported certain AEs, then this dismisses any AEs found by people who received vaccines - which I'm not sure holds.

More importantly - the studies analysed were all considering the vaccine effectiveness where reporting of adverse events was secondary to the purpose of the study - and focused on overall vaccine safety rather than discussion about the AEs themselves.

What I did not see in a brief reading of any of the studies I looked at - was any discussion at all about the nature of the placebo and the liklihood and severity of AEs from the placebo themselves.

It is a fact that injecting anything into the arm (intramuscular) involves a degree of trauma to the skin, tissue and muscle. Differences in technique, including the actual location of the injection may have a significant impact on the effects of that injection.

There has been no discussion at all about the side effects of injecting saline into a muscle. It seems to be assumed that it is a completely safe activity which should have no side effects - and thus any reported AEs from this activity are purely imagined and not real.

Taking a placebo tablet and being told it will have some effect is completely different to receiving a placebo injection. Ingesting a tablet is a non-invasive and non-traumatic event, while having an injection of saline is both invasive and involves skin and tissue trauma. None of the placebo studies linked to by the authors of this paper that I looked at dealt with injections - they were typically oral medication or nasal sprays (there was one study looking at flu vaccinations - but no link was provided and I could not locate it in Google).

Without a discussion about the nature of placebo injections and the reporting of AEs from them - I tend to think poorly of the conclusions drawn.

From the study in question:

The random-effects pooled proportion of placebo recipients reporting at least 1 systemic AE after the first dose was 35.2%; 16.2% reported at least 1 local AE. In comparison, patients treated with vaccines reported higher AE rates, with 46.3% reporting at least 1 systemic AE and 66.7% reporting at least 1 local AE. The ratios between the placebo and vaccine AE proportions suggest that after the first vaccine dose, nocebo responses accounted for 76.0% of systemic AEs and 24.3% of local AEs.​

So by asserting that 35.2% of people receving a placebo had a least 1 systemic AE (headache, fatigue, etc) while 46.3% of 1st dose vaccine recipients reported at least 1 systemic AE - they have then concluded that 35.2/46.3 = 76.0% of vaccine recipients may have experienced the nocebo effect.

Of course, this is the headline that gets published by the media.

Let's look at the overall claims made by the study for local (injection site pain) vs systemic (eg headache, fatigue, etc) AEs after the 1st and 2nd doses.

• 1st dose systemic: 35.2% placebo vs 46.3% vaccine = 76.0% nocebo
• 1st dose local: 16.2% placebo vs 66.7% vaccine = 24.2% nocebo
• 2nd dose systemic: 31.8% placebo vs 61.4% vaccine = 51.8% nocebo
• 2nd dose local: 11.8% vs 72.8% vaccine = 16.2% nocebo

I have a problem with the hypothesis offered in the discussion:

Of interest, AE frequencies in the placebo groups were lower after the second dose than after the first dose, although the opposite was true for the vaccine groups. We hypothesize that

(1) the second dose of the vaccines may have produced both a more robust immune response and a correspondingly more robust set of AEs and that

(2) participants in the vaccine arms, after experiencing more AEs after the first dose than did participants in the control groups, had higher expectations for AEs after the second dose compared with participants in the placebo arms​

Hypothesis (1) is perfectly reasonable - while hypothesis (2) draws a pretty long bow in my opinion, especially when they are not specific about exactly which AEs they are referring to.

I can conceive of situations where the headaches and fatigue induced by the vaccination procedure (stress, anxiety, queueing, the trauma of the injection, etc), are nocebo related. But they extrapolate ANY type of AE to that effect - and conveniently choose to ignore any serious side effects in the study - without any discussion about whether there are degrees of seriousness experienced by people.

I guess my biggest issue is the lack of discussion about the nature of injecting placebos (as opposed to oral or other forms of delivery) and what effect they may actually have.

The fact that someone experienced an AE after receiving a placebo injection does NOT mean that it was imagined or unrelated to the placebo injection. This seems to be the fundamental assumption here - that the placebo injections should have zero side effects - but no study has been done proving this. As I previously mentioned - all of the studies analysed by this one were looking at the efficacy and safety of the vaccines - not whether the placebos had any side effects.

More importantly, the headline infers a lot more than the study actually reported - and while the article does go into a bit more detail - it misses key elements of the discussion.

 

I'll assume you meant hearsay and don't intend to burn me at the steak* for being a heretic

* I prefer medium or even medium rare to overly well done

 

Tetanus injections were always known to be the ones that gave you a hugely sore arm and related pain.

I do remember having tetanus injections as a kid and remember them being extremely painful.

There was also something we had in high school which gave everyone a big puss sore on their arm - I think it was discussed earlier in this thread.

I last had boostrix vaccine for dTpa (diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis) just over 10 years ago - I can't really recall how painful it was that time.

I do recall a worse reaction from the ADT I had back in 1999 - I remember it because it was the first time I got travel related vaccines and I went to a specialist travel vaccination centre to get everything up to date. I remember the oral polio (quick and easy) and then the tetanus which was quite painful - made everything else seem like a minor thing.

Other travel-related vaccines I've had in the past 20 years include Typhim Vi for typhoid (two doses 5 years apart), Havrix 1440 for hepatitis A (2 doses), Engerix-B for hepatitis B (4 doses) and Yellow Fever.

I don't recall anything specifically about any of these of vaccines.

Interestingly, I've never had a flu vaccination (I'm pretty low risk working from home full time) so I don't have any experience there - although my wife has them because of her work but hasn't made much mention of them.

 

You sure you are not a zombie???

The Y-man

 

Do we need to call an ambulance if you suddenly stop posting after 4:21 pm today?

The Y-man

 

Too much info.....

The Y-man