This continuation of our inquiry into the drivers of excess deaths digs a little deeper into the vaccination data to see how many lives the Covid vaccines saved.
I'd like to understand the mathematical basis for the upper limit of 74,000; not finding it in the article anywhere.
For example, are you multiplying 4.5 billion people * some infection rate * some IFR, or...?
How does one say it....COVID vac....The Big Lie....and ultimately The Big Killer...now for cancers to be a REAL concern. These agents of death and disability...those who pushed this poison..no different than Jones Town koolaide...they have dehumanized death...and in a very bad way...early passings...no visits...broken families...all planned out in detail like a well planned funeral...a funeral for a society in belief of God and Country.
I don't understand why no one ever mentions the fact that these alleged cases are *never* confirmed with cultures. After the 2006 PCR-generated "pertussis" outbreak in New England, every case of which was later found to be a false positive, the CDC called culturing the "gold standard" for identifying a virus and warned against using PCR, especially at high cycle thresholds (above 20). Since starting in 2020 the CDC urged labs worldwide to use 40-45 Ct; since rapid antigen testing is even less reliable than high-cycle PCR; since there's not a single symptom of covid that can distinguish it from a common cold caused by any of the other 200 or so viruses that cause the same symptoms; and since the perverse (to put it mildly) incentives for hospitals, doctors, and labs to diagnose covid haven't been reversed, there's no reason to believe that a single one of the cases, much less deaths, are really attributable to covid. Even leaving all that aside, the fatality rate is something like .002% for anyone under 65 without multiple co-morbidities. SARS 1.0 killed fewer than 800 people globally. It's ridiculous to think that this cold virus, constantly mutating to become less pathogenic, has killed any more than that. People can parse the statistics until they're blue in the face, but without a single case proven via culturing, it's all 100% speculation and hypotheticals.
Similarly, no one ever mentions that the starting points for judging efficacy--the statistics published by the drug companies and accepted by the FDA, all of whom know exactly what they're doing--are presented only in RRR terms and never with ARR to add context. In the summer of 2021 The Lancet reported the ARR for each injection like this: BioNtech: .84%; Moderna: 1.24%; Janssen: 1.19%; AZ: 1.28%. Now rewrite the article with those starting points. Better yet, don't bother, because the ARR alone makes it obvious that no one's been saved by these injections. No additional calculations are required.
The "vaccines" don't prevent infection, transmission, hospitalization, or death. They aren't vaccines and they have saved no lives, but they have killed thousands of people who were at zero risk of dying from a cold.
Great article --as you say "completely useless"
I would also say "completely unnecessary" bearing in mind the very low if not zero IFR especially for children.
As you said "A study done in the UK, and involving more than one million participants, found that an almost unimaginable 33.8% of vaccinees reported Covid-like symptoms in that first week after injection". This to me is preposterous ... unless we believe that Covid was "lying in wait ready to pounce on vaccinees" in the week or so after an injection (that'd be a super smart virus!). I'd suggest an alternative reason: the mRNA/DNA jabs turn people into spike factories, and considering the spike is a major component of the virus (some would say the most important component), if that isn't effectively giving the vaccinees Covid then what is it? So despite the official claims - often repeated - that the jabs "can't give you Covid", I disagree, I'd suggest that's exactly what they do to many people (not all perhaps) and hence why so many people suddenly test + soon after their injections.