Replies

Other, scientific entities would have tabulated the total number of cases differently.

OK, well let's go strictly by your numbers, since you stand by them.

Please explain how 500 deaths in 1963 (your number), with the most liberal number of total cases (4,000,000; also your number) calculate into 3 in 100,000.

What type of math are you using? I'm getting 1 in 8,000.

You are really starting to be even more pathetic. "450,000 cases of measles with 450 deaths"

What I cited your CDC source for was your piss poor reference of 450,000 cases and 450 deaths. Even the CDC admits that the more likely number of cases was 4,000,000 not 450,000 as you and your chart claim. Reported does not equal actual cases. There are some pretty graphs I can link if you need pictures.

Since you missed it in post 148:

"There is a little vagary in time and statistics. But thanks for showing your lack of reading comprehension in yet another post. I was commenting to someone other than GunRunner(soi disant expert on all things vaccine [related]due to his immense Google skills and despite his dearth of any real expertise), so I did not dumb it down enough for you. But now that I see you are jumping in on this thread, I will try to keep it down on your level. So, to answer your question....I did not say that the death rate in 1963 was 3 in 100,000 cases. Also, I question you 450,000 cases. These would be cases reported to the CDC(your uncited source), not the total number of cases. Other, scientific entities would have tabulated the total number of cases differently.

Have a nice day!"

Please let me know if you need more clarity.