Posted on 04/23/2022 3:02:01 PM PDT by ransomnote
PING
What’s going on:
1) 96 year-old people with terminal lung cancer are counted as COVID deaths if they had a positive test within 90 days of their death from cancer.
2) Said 96-year old is far more likely to be tripple-vaxxed than a healthy 16 year old.
3) People look at the 96-year old who was triple-vaxxed, died of cancer, and was counted as a COVID death. They then look at the healthy unvaxxed 16-year old. They conclude the vaccine makes it more likely for people to die of COVID.
4) For some reason this type of article gets constantly reposted.
Sounds like time to confiscate some more big rigs.
You cherry picked an anecdote and wish me to assume the entire nation conforms to your ‘happy’ interpretation, even as children die of strokes and heart attacks, athletes drop dead on the green, pilots are grounded, unprecedented levels of peri/myocarditis bloom nationwide, shocking levels of paralysis, death within 2 or 3 days of ‘vaccination’, and you want to just funnel it all through your happy ‘narrative’ instead.
For some reason people like you pretend that Pfizer’s data showed risks that are now born out in human suffering and death.
Wow, so all of them that are the triple vaxxed this article speaks of are 96 years old and have cancer. Who woulda thunk it?
What’s that 1 and a half deaths per 100k ? Not very many
Our oldest son and wife got vax. Our other son, daughter, son in law, 4 grandkids did not get vax. We didn’t get vax.
The ones who got the vax did get covid. The rest of us did not.
Nelson
Look, it’s a valid point. The populations that got to triple vaccinations fastest were the populations we worried about the most, e.g. elderly. My 92 y.o. mother got to triple vaccination status a few days after the earliest possible moment. Florida did a great job of getting the elderly and other highly at risk populations vaccinations first. These are precisely the people who have co-morbidities as a function of age or disease.
When some guy posts information that purports to be
“Pfizer Data” and it has no more indicia of validity than the poster’s claim it is “Pfizer Data”, I’m not biting.
The survival rate has remained the same throughout the entire pandemic.
It’s not a valid point; it was a logical fallacy, Sweeping Generation. Fauci and others though are dead set on stopping all of the information that exposes their lies, and it’s a steady drip, drip.
You can prove this is happened and is common enough to account for the stats, or is it just a hypothetical?
Regardless of one’s interpretation of these statistics, and to be sure there is a LOT of information that is missing to make a serious study, NO ONE has been “vaccinated”. People have gotten none, 1 or 2 or 3 shots of an inadequately tested experimental mRNA drug. Criminally inadequately.
The problem with a graph like this is it just ain’t that simple, too many variables are not accounted for. What this graph says is that there should be some serious money allocated for some heavy duty genuine scientific study on this. NOT the BS that Pfizer claims is testing. That is not going to happen because the mRNA pushers do not want to confront the possibility that the drug is not only not effective, but may well be a health negative.
Statistical analysis of things like this are not accomplished by a simplistic bar graph like this, which is further complicated by a pack of lying politicians with an agenda who will not allow proper research. Or even proper compilation of raw data.
Yup...what else would you expect?
Good for you.
Good post.
Eh, as I recall that was claimed with the UK numbers, but then they teased out the data by age group and the phenomenon still held.
Good analysis. Anecdotal: the 65+ crowd I know has already or plans to get triple vaxxed. The younger folks I know are not planning to get triple vaxxed.
However the data certainly brings the effectiveness of the jabs into very serious doubt...it just does not quite prove that they have no effectiveness or even negative effectiveness. For myself I would love to see more data to verify or dispel such doubts. But is Pfizer running to the rescue with their clinical trial data? Nope. They are fighting to keep it sealed for as many decades as they can.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.