It wasn't 5% kill rate. It's that 100% of the VAERS deaths - deaths close enough to jab that they can't be ignored - were caused by 5% of the batches and those batches were deliberately spread around. This is proof that:
the shots are not uniform.
The manufacturers are deliberately manipulating the ingredients in the shots.
The shots that they are altering are being deliberately distributed to red states.
The shots they are altering are being distributed in a way that masks their lethal effects. No big kill clusters outside select clinics.
You would be correct if there wasn't selection bias involved. Only 1% of cases are ever reported to VAERS. Most doctors don't even know what VAERS is. This means it's more likely that the same doctor/hospital is reporting multiple cases while others report none, which ends up to certain areas being over-represented in VAERS and more likely to have the same batch in their reports.
It is true that a small percentage of adverse events are reported, and certain providers are reporting multiple cases. However, you need to consider that many different providers are reporting adverse events in multiple states all from the same lot. For example, Moderna lot 039K20A had 4993 adverse events reported in 48 states. That's at least 48 providers reporting on the same lot.
48 states all reporting information on the same lot is suspect in itself. How do 48 states all end up with the same lot, and in large enough quantities that it reaches a location in each state that is aware of VAERS and will report issues? If that's not an error of some kind, then this lot must be absolutely massive.
Without knowing whether certain lots are much bigger than other lots, or how many lots exist in total for each vaccine in the US, statistically speaking, the lots are not comparable, and it would be difficult to draw reliable conclusions from this data.
Your point is good that a single lot here looks to be problematic and in this case, selection bias due to reporting is probably not a concern. But we don't know percentage 4,993 is of the total for the lot, and if that's any different from other lots.
I agree. Without knowing the size of these lots it is impossible to draw a conclusion. After doing a little research on the VAERs database, I asked my elderly mother which vaccines she received(I couldn't stop her). Her 1st two shots were both from lots that had a high number of AE reports. Now I am thinking that the suspect lots were much larger than the "safe" lots.
A possible explanation but it doesn't address that the kill batches got spread around while other batches did not.
The thing about these shots, people are dying right away and getting reported and they're dying much later and the death blamed on something else. I think most shots are a slow kill mechanism and some are a potential fast kill mechanism. The slow kill shots go out to one region as a big batch while the fast kill shots get spread around.
The idea of a "kill batch" being spread around, while other batches don't seem to be as deadly has multiple problems with it.
As I mentioned earlier, the primary issue is reporting, if some batch goes to some place where there are high likelihood of reporting issues, and another doesn't, it will make the former look deadlier, even if they both have the same kill rate.
But there's other problems also. If one batch is 10 times the size of another batch, it might appear to be 10 times deadlier assuming there is consistency to the reporting of each.
To put it simply, we don't have enough data to draw any reliable conclusions regarding specific batches versus others. We do know overall that these vaccines are dangerous, and seem to be more dangerous and deadly than previous vaccines. But without knowing how many batches there are, the size of each one, where each one ended up going, what percentage of the batch remained in the US versus being shipped to other countries, reliable numbers on adverse affects and death, trying to draw statistical conclusions isn't feasible.
It wasn't 5% kill rate. It's that 100% of the VAERS deaths - deaths close enough to jab that they can't be ignored - were caused by 5% of the batches and those batches were deliberately spread around. This is proof that:
the shots are not uniform.
The manufacturers are deliberately manipulating the ingredients in the shots.
The shots that they are altering are being deliberately distributed to red states.
The shots they are altering are being distributed in a way that masks their lethal effects. No big kill clusters outside select clinics.
It's hard evidence of a malicious conspiracy.
You would be correct if there wasn't selection bias involved. Only 1% of cases are ever reported to VAERS. Most doctors don't even know what VAERS is. This means it's more likely that the same doctor/hospital is reporting multiple cases while others report none, which ends up to certain areas being over-represented in VAERS and more likely to have the same batch in their reports.
It is true that a small percentage of adverse events are reported, and certain providers are reporting multiple cases. However, you need to consider that many different providers are reporting adverse events in multiple states all from the same lot. For example, Moderna lot 039K20A had 4993 adverse events reported in 48 states. That's at least 48 providers reporting on the same lot.
48 states all reporting information on the same lot is suspect in itself. How do 48 states all end up with the same lot, and in large enough quantities that it reaches a location in each state that is aware of VAERS and will report issues? If that's not an error of some kind, then this lot must be absolutely massive.
Without knowing whether certain lots are much bigger than other lots, or how many lots exist in total for each vaccine in the US, statistically speaking, the lots are not comparable, and it would be difficult to draw reliable conclusions from this data.
Your point is good that a single lot here looks to be problematic and in this case, selection bias due to reporting is probably not a concern. But we don't know percentage 4,993 is of the total for the lot, and if that's any different from other lots.
I agree. Without knowing the size of these lots it is impossible to draw a conclusion. After doing a little research on the VAERs database, I asked my elderly mother which vaccines she received(I couldn't stop her). Her 1st two shots were both from lots that had a high number of AE reports. Now I am thinking that the suspect lots were much larger than the "safe" lots.
This. What we're seeing is very simple: Red states are the ones filling all the VAERS reports, and the reporters all administered a single lot number.
A possible explanation but it doesn't address that the kill batches got spread around while other batches did not.
The thing about these shots, people are dying right away and getting reported and they're dying much later and the death blamed on something else. I think most shots are a slow kill mechanism and some are a potential fast kill mechanism. The slow kill shots go out to one region as a big batch while the fast kill shots get spread around.
I hate that this situation even exists.
The idea of a "kill batch" being spread around, while other batches don't seem to be as deadly has multiple problems with it.
As I mentioned earlier, the primary issue is reporting, if some batch goes to some place where there are high likelihood of reporting issues, and another doesn't, it will make the former look deadlier, even if they both have the same kill rate.
But there's other problems also. If one batch is 10 times the size of another batch, it might appear to be 10 times deadlier assuming there is consistency to the reporting of each.
To put it simply, we don't have enough data to draw any reliable conclusions regarding specific batches versus others. We do know overall that these vaccines are dangerous, and seem to be more dangerous and deadly than previous vaccines. But without knowing how many batches there are, the size of each one, where each one ended up going, what percentage of the batch remained in the US versus being shipped to other countries, reliable numbers on adverse affects and death, trying to draw statistical conclusions isn't feasible.
Good point
This might be because Republicans are far more likely to report a vaccine injury.
Makes sense.