The findings in this report are subject to at least four limitations.
First, the study was observational, and individual-level confounders that were not adjusted for might affect mortality risk, including baseline health status, underlying conditions, health care utilization, and socioeconomic status.
Second, healthy vaccinee effects were found in all but the youngest age group. Such effects were also found in a cohort study conducted in a nursing home population, which reported substantially lower aRRs for 7-day mortality among vaccinated residents after dose 1 (0.34) and dose 2 (0.49) as compared with unvaccinated residents (5). Lower rates of non–COVID-19 mortality in vaccinated groups suggest that COVID-19 vaccinees are inherently healthier or engage in fewer risk behaviors (7,8); future analyses will address these issues.
Third, although deaths associated with COVID-19 were excluded, causes of death were not assessed. It is possible that the algorithm used might have misclassified some deaths associated with COVID-19 because of lack of testing or because individual mortality reviews were not conducted.
Finally, the findings might not be applicable to the general population.
I think the key here is Third reason. They probably did the same fuckery they do with covid-19 numbers for unvaxxed in general, but for vaxxed in this study. By declaring deaths are due to Covid-19, you remove it from non-covid-19 group.
What they should have done is all cause mortality - dont bother covid status, simply check for deaths from any cause - that way they wont have anywhere to hide.
Precisely it fren! Each of one those undercuts the shit out of the this ‘study’ . But in order for that to matter, sheep would have to be aware there even IS fine print, much less take the time and brain capacity to read it. Only a matter of time before the vaxxed dipshit at work (who’s been sick like 9x over the last year) waltzes in claiming to be ‘inherently healthier’ (when I haven’t been sick even the slightest in over a year kek)
We live in the era where people get their world view fed to them via new paper headlines only. These articles nowadays don't even bother linking to the actual studies and you have to follow multiple links to even get to the studies. Chances are, their normal audience will never even realise these limitations exist. Talk about amplifying misinformation.
One of the dataset that Steve Kirsch (the guy who presented deadliness of vaccines at FDA) had gotten hold was something he paid 50K personally.
First they discredit VAERs, which is the only official way to track vaccine adverse effects, and is already 50x-100x under-reported. Then, whatever other data is present, they dont make it available for public access. Then they censor any dissenting opinions. And finally they push it for 5+ kids without even an FDA approval (which by itself means shit, except a bit more liability)
“VSD, a collaborative project between CDC’s Immunization Safety Office and nine health care organizations, collects electronic health data, including information on vaccines, for specific studies.“
Nine health care organizations sounds suspiciously like 17 intelligence agencies.
This result either shows an extremely flawed methodology or that the health care system is discriminating against non vaccinated people.
Maybe selecting people who took flu shots biased the sample and the correction for age etc further distorted the result.
They should take a single age group like 30-40 yrs where the vaccine uptake is fairly low and do all cause mortality. I suspect they wouldn't be able to publish that result though.
I suspect their process was
. run the numbers
. Discover the vaccine is killing more people than covid
. Diddle the methodology until this improbable result emerges
. Profit!
Study: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7043e2.htm?s_cid=mm7043e2_w
Nuggets from the study:
I think the key here is Third reason. They probably did the same fuckery they do with covid-19 numbers for unvaxxed in general, but for vaxxed in this study. By declaring deaths are due to Covid-19, you remove it from non-covid-19 group.
What they should have done is all cause mortality - dont bother covid status, simply check for deaths from any cause - that way they wont have anywhere to hide.
Precisely it fren! Each of one those undercuts the shit out of the this ‘study’ . But in order for that to matter, sheep would have to be aware there even IS fine print, much less take the time and brain capacity to read it. Only a matter of time before the vaxxed dipshit at work (who’s been sick like 9x over the last year) waltzes in claiming to be ‘inherently healthier’ (when I haven’t been sick even the slightest in over a year kek)
We live in the era where people get their world view fed to them via new paper headlines only. These articles nowadays don't even bother linking to the actual studies and you have to follow multiple links to even get to the studies. Chances are, their normal audience will never even realise these limitations exist. Talk about amplifying misinformation.
They'll never let the people see the real raw numbers.
One of the dataset that Steve Kirsch (the guy who presented deadliness of vaccines at FDA) had gotten hold was something he paid 50K personally.
First they discredit VAERs, which is the only official way to track vaccine adverse effects, and is already 50x-100x under-reported. Then, whatever other data is present, they dont make it available for public access. Then they censor any dissenting opinions. And finally they push it for 5+ kids without even an FDA approval (which by itself means shit, except a bit more liability)
How do people not wake up?
“VSD, a collaborative project between CDC’s Immunization Safety Office and nine health care organizations, collects electronic health data, including information on vaccines, for specific studies.“
Nine health care organizations sounds suspiciously like 17 intelligence agencies.
This result either shows an extremely flawed methodology or that the health care system is discriminating against non vaccinated people.
Maybe selecting people who took flu shots biased the sample and the correction for age etc further distorted the result.
They should take a single age group like 30-40 yrs where the vaccine uptake is fairly low and do all cause mortality. I suspect they wouldn't be able to publish that result though.
I suspect their process was . run the numbers . Discover the vaccine is killing more people than covid . Diddle the methodology until this improbable result emerges . Profit!
Exactly. Improbable result = most probably manipulated data
Kind of funny they didn't find a result a little more believable. Maybe it's a cry for help.