Another Young, Fit Doctor who Pushed mRNA Dies Suddenly
(sandrarose.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (36)
sorted by:
American right-wingers have two explanations when someone under the age of 50 dies: either it was the vaccine, or he was murdered by the Clintons.
Like when that poor woman of the Diamond and Silk duo died. She was never vaccinated, but they immediately cried that it was the vaccine. After they realized it wasn't the vaccine, I guess the Clintons murdered her after all.
Worth reading: https://archive.is/ltT82
It is a simple question of whether you understand statistics. That's all it comes down to, basic math.
Statistically we are seeing completely impossible figures, and those figures are likely manipulated heavily to make them seem not as bad. The raw data that occasionally seeps through all show the same thing: healthy people are dying at a historically impossible rate.
You're arguing with someone who thinks the jabs still work lol. Not even left retards think they work anymore.
How exactly is it either statistically or historically impossible?
Young, healthy people have always died 'suddenly'. Remember Andrew Breitbart (although many on the right claimed it was MURDER!!!!)? Some of these deaths may be the result of the vaccine, but any death is branded as such by people who are keen to take revenge for all the retards who laughed at unvaccinated people dying from corona.
Yes and no. You are saying outliers from the past now explain a common occurrence.
If forest fires happen 3 times a year every year for 80 years then suddenly happen 18 times a year after they change the fire prevention system would you say that is simply just coincidence and use the original data as proof?
Trendspotting and forecasting are huge in the insurance industry because that is how they adjust rates. The insurance industry is saying for 'unknown reasons' now there is a much, much higher chance you'll die young and healthy in developed nations.
That is a trend, not an outlier. The trends are all showing the same thing: something is killing young healthy people at an untold rate.
Just because it occasionally happened before doesn't mean that can be used to explain the steady increase in all developed nations who happened to shoot up an experimental drug.
Absolutely not what I meant. I'm saying that any given case of 'died suddenly' is not proof positive that it was caused by the vaccine. Obviously, if such cases double, then it is something that would be very suspicious.
Ironically, this is the pro-climate change argument. But interestingly enough, even establishment authorities say that there is no evidence that natural disasters are increasing due to climate change - but the media keeps claiming it anyway.
Is it?
I have not seen the trends. Only people posting individual cases, some of which have absolutely nothing to do with any vaccine, some of them from before any vaccine was released, and blaming it all on the thing that they don't like.
If there is such a trend, then the numbers themselves should be discussed, not individual cases.
Utterly meaningless statement that only serves to confuse the issue. We're talking about statistics.
In the context of a statistical discussion, this statement is a either a bald-faced lie or a tacit admission of a complete lack of understanding of statistics.
Which is it in your case?
He wants to make a single bad faith example to detract from the actual data. It's the equivalent of anecdotal advice to derail solidly true trends.