LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

More good news about those amazing “vaccines!”

More lies from GP....gotta pay the bills.

Why would give years worth of data have anything to do with the vaccines?

Dipshits gotta dipshit
 
ll74 said:
Yep..plenty of mockery to provide for dipshits who have to announce their grievances daily.
Click to expand...

No, as in the data that keep coming out showing the vaccines are of little use or even causing harm. It's getting harder to cover it up.
 
Bud_Spencer said:
No, as in the data that keep coming out showing the vaccines are of little use or even causing harm. It's getting harder to cover it up.
Click to expand...

That's not actually what the data is saying. That's what GP is saying. If you read the data, it easily shows that GP consistently lies or misrepresents the information.

But if you enjoy that sorta thing, you must be happy that BiDudey shares so much of it.
 
As an example....duration of the "increase" goes well beyond any that might be related to the vaccine....yet here GP is.....connecting it as if it's verified.

And yet you chumps keep eating up all that confirmation bias without question....
 
ll74 said:
That's not actually what the data is saying. That's what GP is saying. If you read the data, it easily shows that GP consistently lies or misrepresents the information.

But if you enjoy that sorta thing, you must be happy that BiDudey shares so much of it.
Click to expand...

LOLOL! Let’s see the data. GP links to theirs most of the time. Unlike ANY LibTard source!
 
BidudeinWi said:
LOLOL! Let’s see the data. GP links to theirs most of the time. Unlike ANY LibTard source!
Click to expand...

I was incorrect in my original statement. It mentions vaccine injuries. It mentions an increase from them, but it doesn't mention the number of vaccinations. The source data takes you to the blaze (shocker that.GP ripped off their story). If you increase the number of people getting a vaccine 10 fold, then adverse effects will increase by the same amount.

Not to mention that you're adding older people than you would normally to the mix, and they are at higher risk of miscarriages.

Bottom line is that GP doesn't dig into any of the data.....they throw up the gotcha without even trying to come up with an alternative explanation. Ron Johnson does this as well.

And so do you.
 
So having access to my PC, I was able to look at the source links from the Blaze. All the sources link to video or just an info page on what the data represents and how one might download it if they are in the military.

My question would be:
1. What is the count and age groups, year over year, of those taking vaccines?
2. How has that data changed?

With those two things, you would be able to tell if the skew in data is because of the increase in count or age or both - or whether there's no correlation between them.

With VAERS data, it's easy to identify that both more people are taking the vaccine AND more older people are taking them within that timeframe.

We know that:
1. an increase in count should (on average) raise the count of adverse events by the same amount
2. an increase in count of risky age groups for other medical events should (on average) raise the count of adverse events by an increasing amount

Example:
If you have car accident data that says that
1. there were 50 car accidents on road connection x/y
2. there were 300 drivers that reported driving on connection x/y
3. 5 of those drivers were in a group of people considered risky

One year, that data is changed by the following:
1. There were 1000 car accidents on road connection x/y
2. There were 4000 drivers that reported driving on connection x/y
3. 200 of those drivers were in a group of people considered risky

The above result is a 95% increase in accidents year over year.
At the same time, it's a 70% increase in the number of drivers
And a 75% increase on the numbers of drivers that are considered risky

Now, taking out the danger of the intersection due to increased traffic (because that leads to other side effects due to infrastructure, not related to drivers) - you can easily see that the reason that accidents increased is that you have more possibilities for accidents by volume AND you have a much higher percentage who are known to be at risk for accidents.

As an analogy, blaming a new makeup of automobile would not be a logical conclusion to explain the increase.
 
ll74 said:
With VAERS data, it's easy to identify that both more people are taking the vaccine AND more older people are taking them within that timeframe.
Click to expand...
Dude, as you've said many times, you aren't allowed to use VAERS data.
 
LittleDixie said:
Dude, as you've said many times, you aren't allowed to use VAERS data.
Click to expand...

lol, there's a difference between using data or what it was meant for and using data for what it wasn't meant for.

Medical professionals can tell the difference with VAERS data, which is why they laugh at people who use it to whine about vaccines.
 
ll74 said:
lol, there's a difference between using data or what it was meant for and using data for what it wasn't meant for.

Medical professionals can tell the difference with VAERS data, which is why they laugh at people who use it to whine about vaccines.
Click to expand...
You are misinterpreting the VAERS data. It was never meant to be interpreted... As. You. Have. Said. Many. Times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BidudeinWi
Massive 145-Country Study Shows Sharp INCREASE of Transmission and DEATH After Introd
Replies
18
Views
502
Philthy_Phil
Philthy_Phil
Mike_Yates
Global effects of total nuclear war
Replies
3
Views
619
Brains_N_Boobs
Brains_N_Boobs
Mike_Yates
Simulated nuclear war
Replies
0
Views
547
Mike_Yates
Mike_Yates
Obama_Sucks
Your Assignment: Compile Obama’s Flip-Flops
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
Pad_Foot
Pad_Foot
Songcatcher
Things you should know but don't
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2K
Songcatcher
Songcatcher
Back
Top