vaccination side effects

Hush9300

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Messages
2,141
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecAve
567044365049723881415236342614407783718442494462825131756672Total(2020 + JAn,Feb, Mar 2021)78862852575.2
73315587674862441513378644122343264431514752046511Rest 202130104643006
No. Just no... You talk about manipulating statistics to further an agenda yet you blatantly do the same.

Jan - October 2020 = 499,933
Jan - October 2021 = 524,975

The UK started vaccinations in the second week of December 2020. The vaccine has made no dent whatsoever on all cause mortality. None.

Covid was apparently 2020's great killer, yet the introduction of a highly effective vaccine has done nothing to arrest this trend.

There are much simpler explanations than all this mental gymnastics:

1. Covid was and continues to pick off the vulnerable, even post vaccination or;
2. Covid wasn't that deadly to begin with or;
3. If vaccine is so effective, all cause parity is a result of vaccine injury

My money is on 1 and 2.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
25,235
There are much simpler explanations than all this mental gymnastics:

1. Covid was and continues to pick off the vulnerable, even post vaccination or;
2. Covid wasn't that deadly to begin with or;
3. If vaccine is so effective, all cause parity is a result of vaccine injury
I would not write off 3 so easily, as, all over the place, there is evidence emerging that deaths due to vaccine injury are just not been logged correctly.
 

JohnStarr

Executive Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
9,342
I would not write off 3 so easily, as, all over the place, there is evidence emerging that deaths due to vaccine injury are just not been logged correctly.
Since it's all over the place, could you please provide evidence? To back up the claim.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
25,235
There are much simpler explanations than all this mental gymnastics:
As discussed many months ago, most of these "mental statistical gymnastics" were then and are still nothing more than an exercise in the basics and contribute very little to nothing in the understanding of the impact of this virus. The ONLY figure we need to bother about is the excess deaths beyond the norm.
 

JustinB

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
1,088
How would you know if you had/have blood clots?
Apart from doing scans? Some clots are visible - my brother had a pretty significant clot in his leg that you could feel and see. A clot in the lung can cause symptoms such as low SpO2 stats.

When my lungs recovery stagnated for a couple days, the doc had scans done to see if there were clots.

Not sure if that helps, but if you're worried and are experiencing some sort of symptom, you should get it checked out.
 

JustinB

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
1,088
As discussed many months ago, most of these "mental statistical gymnastics" were then and are still nothing more than an exercise in the basics and contribute very little to nothing in the understanding of the impact of this virus. The ONLY figure we need to bother about is the excess deaths beyond the norm.
Excluding murders and MVAs etc.
 

Hush9300

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Messages
2,141
I would not write off 3 so easily, as, all over the place, there is evidence emerging that deaths due to vaccine injury are just not been logged correctly.
I put 3 in there to piss people off. I'm almost sure that it is not the case because said deaths would have to be rather significant. You simply cannot sweep that many bodies under a rug.
 

JohnStarr

Executive Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
9,342
If you got vaccinated and a piano falls on your head - it's vaccine death don't you know
I know. And I know that Geoffly has me on Ignore as I have him too. I enjoy poking him with a stick. Like now...provide proof to backup a wide-ranging, possibly incorrect statement.
He won't, will simply ignore it, and his comment will go unchecked.
 

Hush9300

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Messages
2,141
As discussed many months ago, most of these "mental statistical gymnastics" were then and are still nothing more than an exercise in the basics and contribute very little to nothing in the understanding of the impact of this virus. The ONLY figure we need to bother about is the excess deaths beyond the norm.
Using excess deaths is in itself flawed as expected deaths are predicted. In that sense 2020 will account for more as predicted mortality going forward would have been adjusted upwards.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
25,235
I put 3 in there to piss people off. I'm almost sure that it is not the case because said deaths would have to be rather significant. You simply cannot sweep that many bodies under a rug.
It is not about sweeping bodies under the rug. You can't. But you CAN log deaths incorrectly --- that is just a matter of ticking the right or wrong block and failing to acknowledge a contributing cause of death.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
25,235
Using excess deaths is in itself flawed as expected deaths are predicted. In that sense 2020 will account for more as predicted mortality going forward would have been adjusted upwards.
Really not a problem - just understand how individual countries analyse "deaths" to come up with an "excess death" value.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
25,235
Then the posts above referring to all-cause mortality are irrelevant.
Most of the time people are "assuming" "all-cause deaths" is referring to "all-cause NATURAL deaths".

Yes it is is careless talk, but that is the way it is everywhere.
Hence why the SAMRC take so much care in preparing their reports.
 

Hush9300

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Messages
2,141
It is not about sweeping bodies under the rug. You can't. But you CAN log deaths incorrectly --- that is just a matter of ticking the right or wrong block and failing to acknowledge a contributing cause of death.
I refuse to believe that basically all medical personnel are rotten to the core. It's highly improbable in my opinion.
 

Hush9300

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Messages
2,141
Most of the time people are "assuming" "all-cause deaths" is referring to "all-cause NATURAL deaths".

Yes it is is careless talk, but that is the way it is everywhere.
Hence why the SAMRC take so much care in preparing their reports.
The all cause mortality we're referring to is natural deaths.
 

JustinB

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
1,088
I refuse to believe that basically all medical personnel are rotten to the core. It's highly improbable in my opinion.
Of course. Its also improbable that big pharma or some secret society has paid off all governments, or that all governments are colluding to "enforce control" over society.

But people believe some weird stuff...
 

JohnStarr

Executive Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
9,342
It is not about sweeping bodies under the rug. You can't. But you CAN log deaths incorrectly --- that is just a matter of ticking the right or wrong block and failing to acknowledge a contributing cause of death.
Are you openly accusing doctors of doing this? Or saying it could happen and putting it down to fatigue etc?
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
25,235
I refuse to believe that basically all medical personnel are rotten to the core. It's highly improbable in my opinion.
So do I. I have said so many, many times. I refuse to believe those doing observational studies are deliberately practising fraud etc.
As our esteemed Eskom CEO says.

Hanlon's razor is an adage or rule of thumb that states "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity

Or, in more general terms:

"never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity [or incompetence or inadequate training]".
 
Top