This thread was deleted by a volunteer moderator. I certainly don't want a thread this big deleted so I've restored. THat being said, this thread has served it's purpose. I've closed it to new posts.
We have a new 2024 vaccine thread here. New people don't need to try to wade through 20,000 posts to figure out what is going on.
…says the guy that believes reporting data is “math.” LOL
Google 'base rate fallacy.' This was your homework last week and it's clear you haven't done it. Don't make me call home.
Right wingers will only stop humiliating themselves when owning the libs is not a factor in their decision making and thinking anymore. Unfortunately, owning the libs consumes their every living moment. What happened to sane conservatives?
Yes, confirmation bias, as many blame vaccine side effects on "long covid" or simply any covid. Also, look at how 'vaccinated' and 'unvaccinated' are operationally defined, look at the period of days before an individual is considered one or the other.
One need only look at the DMED stats to know the clotshot is causing bad damage. There have been dramatic rate increases in 2021 vs. the 5 year average. The DoD's official response is that it was a magical 5 year glitch that only affected the events related to the clot shot, which HAPPEN to coincide with the events from VAERS.
However, unlike VAERS, this database cannot be dismissed using hand-waving arguments. DMED is not a self-reported database where reporting rates are unknown. It is a fully reported database where all the reports are from healthcare providers. So if the vaccines are safe, the DMED data is hard to explain. You can’t pin the rise in events in 2021 on COVID since total hospital event rates declined in 2020 (relative to 2019) in both the original and corrected results. The DoD now claims the 2016-2020 data was wrong and issued corrected values. It's a total coverup and anybody with a brain can see that.
OK, I didn't actually read to the end of your post, but I see that you acknowledge that the DoD did disclose that the data for 2016-2020 is wrong. Your dismissal of this as a DoD "cover-up" is the lazy way out - when you can't make a reasonable argument based on facts, just claim that it's a cover-up, or fake news, or a lie foisted upon us by the "MSM" or the "establishment".
Seriously, why would the DoD lie about this?
Some of the claimed rises in certain conditions were “completely implausible from a biologic standpoint” according to oncologist and editor of the blog Science-Based Medicine, Dr David Gorski. The data claimed to show the incidence of testicular cancer had risen by 395%, the incidence of oesophageal cancer had risen by 894% and the incidence of breast cancer had risen 487%. Dr Gorski wrote: “Cancer is the culmination of a process that, in general, takes years, from the initial insult that resulted in cellular transformation to the development of a cancerous tumor detectable by symptoms, physical exam, or screening tests. “Even if there had been a spike in these cancers from roughly four- to ten-fold in just one year (for an overall increase in total cancer diagnoses from 36,050 to 114,645 from 2020 to 2021), it could not possibly have been due to [...] COVID-19 vaccines.”
lol the level of coping and denial here is ridiculous. No, blaming this all on a 'glitch' is the "lazy way out."
Yes, the mRNA injection radically accelerates cancers. This is known. And you're ignoring all the other explosive increases in conditions. Cancer is just one small part of it (sadly).
Look, you can say the 'vaccine' is safe and effective all you want to protect your ego and mind from scary what-ifs, but deep down you're concerned. You injected yourself with something experimental that could have very bad long-term effects. You didn't have to, you simply had to wait it out like many of us did, seeing as mandates are now mostly dropping everywhere. The smartest move was not to play.
As for the DoD, the healthcare professionals assessing these military personnel and their conditions post-vax are not lying, they're reporting to DMED accurately and truthfully. The superstructure is the one 'lying.'
Live in denial all you want, fine. The fact is it's a disaster and insurance company all-cause mortality rates prove this further.
It's interesting how some people on this thread (who were probably conservatives long before COVID) seem to know so many individuals suffering from vaccine injuries, and yet there are others on this thread (who were probably liberals long before COVID) claim to not know a single person who was negatively affected by the vaccine.
Is it confirmation bias? Are people being disingenuous? Is it a political conspiracy that only affects one half of the political spectrum?
Yes, confirmation bias, as many blame vaccine side effects on "long covid" or simply any covid. Also, look at how 'vaccinated' and 'unvaccinated' are operationally defined, look at the period of days before an individual is considered one or the other.
One need only look at the DMED stats to know the clotshot is causing bad damage. There have been dramatic rate increases in 2021 vs. the 5 year average. The DoD's official response is that it was a magical 5 year glitch that only affected the events related to the clot shot, which HAPPEN to coincide with the events from VAERS.
However, unlike VAERS, this database cannot be dismissed using hand-waving arguments. DMED is not a self-reported database where reporting rates are unknown. It is a fully reported database where all the reports are from healthcare providers. So if the vaccines are safe, the DMED data is hard to explain. You can’t pin the rise in events in 2021 on COVID since total hospital event rates declined in 2020 (relative to 2019) in both the original and corrected results. The DoD now claims the 2016-2020 data was wrong and issued corrected values. It's a total coverup and anybody with a brain can see that.
It's a skill to point out the blind spots of others, but a talent to be aware of one's own. If you read my post and patted yourself on the back for being 100% correct, it's possible you missed its intention.
…says the guy that believes reporting data is “math.” LOL
Google 'base rate fallacy.' This was your homework last week and it's clear you haven't done it. Don't make me call home.
Start a thread in bAsE rAtE FaLLaCy and we’ll all discuss your new obsession there, and only there. I promise I’ll contribute if you stop repeating yourself here for 7 days.
btw- You couldn’t make it more obvious that you have zero educational background or practical work experience in a quantitative field. You’re obsessing over a term you read in an article that supports you view, while displaying no other evidence that your brain operates in a quantitative manner. Your hypothetical question from several pages back “what if 99% of the the area was vaccinated?” was so elementary in nature… so unrealistic… so ignorant… it exposed you as probably an English major trying to read and recite his way to relevance in a quantitative discussion. But you can’t fake being a STEM brain.
BS Engineering / MS Engineering / MBA-Finance / LSSBB / Currently rebuilding the Data Infrastructure at my company.
It's a skill to point out the blind spots of others, but a talent to be aware of one's own. If you read my post and patted yourself on the back for being 100% correct, it's possible you missed its intention.
No blind spots, and I'm not disingenuous. People I know who are vaxxed are experiencing symptoms they didn't have before or from covid, and these are side effects commonly associated with the vax.
Also the reason some people say "everyone's fine" and others say "everyone's sick" could be due to the specific vax batch:
Just a reminder of antivaxxers posting people collapsing 11 years ago and claiming its because of the vaccine.
Or claiming that a tennis player who withdrew from a tournament due to foot blisters withdrew due to the effects of the vaccine.
Surely you know foot blisters are a side effect of the vaccine?
Noy quite the same as saying Nick Kyrgios pulled out of the Australian Open this year,even though he got to the final of the mixed doubles.Or Jakupovic pulled out die to the vaccine when her collapse was 2 years ago.Some of the claims are so stupid it's unreal.
lol the level of coping and denial here is ridiculous. No, blaming this all on a 'glitch' is the "lazy way out."
Yes, the mRNA injection radically accelerates cancers. This is known. And you're ignoring all the other explosive increases in conditions. Cancer is just one small part of it (sadly).
There is zero evidence for this. You'd have to believe in a gigantic worldwide conspiracy to think otherwise. Comical
Google 'base rate fallacy.' This was your homework last week and it's clear you haven't done it. Don't make me call home.
Start a thread in bAsE rAtE FaLLaCy and we’ll all discuss your new obsession there, and only there. I promise I’ll contribute if you stop repeating yourself here for 7 days.
btw- You couldn’t make it more obvious that you have zero educational background or practical work experience in a quantitative field. You’re obsessing over a term you read in an article that supports you view, while displaying no other evidence that your brain operates in a quantitative manner. Your hypothetical question from several pages back “what if 99% of the the area was vaccinated?” was so elementary in nature… so unrealistic… so ignorant… it exposed you as probably an English major trying to read and recite his way to relevance in a quantitative discussion. But you can’t fake being a STEM brain.
BS Engineering / MS Engineering / MBA-Finance / LSSBB / Currently rebuilding the Data Infrastructure at my company.
I've been talking about base rate fallacies on here for over a year because 'highly credentialed' blowhards like yourself cannot seem to wrap their minds around basic division.
The fact that you cannot even adjust your raw numbers for the overall vax rate – the simplest confounder to correct for – in Michigan shows that you either:
1) don't understand the concept of a denominator (~65% chance) or
2) recognize that accounting for confounders would reverse the trend you are trying to hype – so you refuse to do it – (~25% chance) or
3) are so deep down the 'vax bad' hysteria hole that you think 'people who get vaccinated still go to the hospital!!!1' is some kind of meaningful conclusion at this point (~10% chance).
Now, back to your homework. Have you googled 'base rate fallacy' yet? We're going to have to discuss your classroom behavior with your family and the headmaster if you won't do the work.
