Attributing every ailment to vaccines: the fundamental error

Why does every illness around you seem to be the vaccine's fault?

If people around you get sick and you believe the vaccine is to blame, the right question isn't whether these cases exist—they do—but whether your sample is sufficient to prove anything. In recent weeks, a handful of personal accounts have reignited an intuition that has been circulating since 2021: the subjective feeling that ELbichito vaccines are starting to take their toll. The evidence supporting this impression consists of specific cases: a brother-in-law who seems to have aged ten years in one, a sister who is wasting away without a clear diagnosis, a neighbor who lost their sight after the second dose. Is that enough?

The short answer, and also the long one, is no. But debunking it deserves more than a dismissive 'no.' Because the phenomenon behind it has a technical name, base rate fallacy, and it explains why millions of intelligent people reach the same erroneous conclusion without anyone lying.

The Undertaker's Argument and the Sample Trap

There's a recurring testimony in the debate: that of a funeral home worker who claims business is better than ever. It sounds damning. It is, in reality, the perfect example of reasoning that collapses upon first contact with demographics. Spain today has more elderly people than ever in its history, life expectancy now exceeds 84 years for the first time, and the absolute mortality curve continues to rise simply because the population pyramid has inverted. An undertaker in a town who sees more coffins being carried than twenty years ago isn't describing a health collapse: they're describing the aging of that town.

The second pillar is even simpler. If the percentage of vaccinated individuals exceeds 80-90% in most risk cohorts, any heart attack, any stroke, any tumor that appears in your vicinity will statistically occur in a vaccinated person. Not because the vaccine caused it: because almost everyone is vaccinated. Attributing every ailment to the vaccine is confusing coincidence with causation, and this error has a perverse property—the brain commits it without warning—.

The Specific Cases Circulating: No Diagnosis, No Proven Link

When reviewing the testimonies that fuel this perception, a pattern emerges: none come with an autopsy, medical report, or epidemiological study. A blood clot in a leg after the second dose, subsequent blindness, vasculitis years later, a case of myocarditis in a 50-year-old man. These are serious and real events for those experiencing them, but science doesn't work by adding up anecdotes: it works by comparing the frequency with which these same conditions occur in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. This is where pharmacovigilance studies did detect signals—myocarditis with some mRNA vaccines in young males, thrombosis with bicho—and also where it was concluded that the benefit far outweighed the risk.

It is legitimate to discuss the timelines, transparency, or communication of these risks. What is not legitimate is to transform a sum of unverified cases into a natural law.

From Bias to Conspiracy Narrative: Where the Line is Crossed

In the loudest segment of the debate, the conversation slides into territories with no empirical backing: graphene in vaccines, 'dangerous' batches, home analyses with dancing molecules. None of this has passed serious review. It's important to state this plainly because the line between 'I have doubts about an adverse effect' and 'I've been injected with secret material' is exactly the line between legitimate skepticism and misinformation.

And not everyone who suspects belongs to the latter group. There are participants who expressly present themselves as unvaccinated and describe confronting a nurse during the mass vaccination campaign with photocopies to question them about the leaflets. The scene, however uncomfortable, well illustrates part of the issue: many people didn't ask for proof because they believed in a conspiracy, but because they felt reasonable questions lacked answers.

What the Figures Say Versus the Sensation

Life expectancy in Spain exceeds 84 years for the first time. This is an inconvenient fact for the collapse theory, and thus it's dismissed as easily as official statistics were previously disregarded. When statistics contradict a feeling, the statistics almost always lose. This is a rule of human psychology, not epidemiology.

What does exist is a real and measurable phenomenon on the other side: the pandemic excess mortality of 2020-2021 and the enormous impact left by the disease itself on thousands of survivors. These harms exist and were not caused by any vaccine. The disappearance of this detail from the usual narrative reveals a lot about how these sensations are constructed: memory retains what confirms suspicion and archives what refutes it.

---

With lives at stake, it's worth remembering something fundamental: any serious symptom or clinical condition should be consulted with a healthcare professional, not a messaging group. And any claim about drug damages must be supported by data, not perceptions. The rest, as the undertaker's story itself implied, is just business.