*Edit to say my math is probably retarded, but the point stands....
I watched a very interesting video from someone who analyzed the VAERS data. The vast majority of problems clustered in 1 in 200 vaccine batches.
It looked as though the companies (Pfizer, J&J and Moderna) were coordinating when the bad batches were released when he time plotted the data.
If your odds of getting a bad batch are 1 in 200, then for every subsequent shot/booster, your odds of exposure go up significantly.
1 in 200 first dose / 1 in 100 by second dose / 1 in 50 with booster / 1 in 25 on second booster and so on. By the 8th dose, your odds of getting a bad batch somewhere along the line is 1 in 1.5625 cases which means that 64% of the vaccine recipients would have had a bad batch along the way.
And the VAERS data likely doesn't even capture the long-term side effects such as damaging your immune system (HIV like) or causing cancer down the road. They primarily report immediate outcomes like strokes, myocarditis, bells palsy, etc.
That video was very seriously flawed. It's basic premise is impossible.
I downloaded the VAERS data and tried to recreate his results.
It's impossible that '1 in 200 batches' were a problem, because there are only (roughly) 300 real batch numbers.
The remaining 40,000+ (false) 'batches' are various typos, or entries like 'N/A', or 'Unknown', 'idk', etc. One-third of all the entries were simply blank. These false batches are identified as 'a huge number of safe batches', each with only one or two entries. But they don't actually exist. They are data errors.
If he removed (or corrected) all the typos, he would be left with (roughly) 300 batches -- but he would still have no way of knowing if those batches were of the same total size (and therefore analytically comparable). The CDC specifically states that it will not release that information to the public.
Just because this (very flawed) video supports our point of view, it doesn't mean we shouldn't check to see if it is a proper analysis. And it isn't.
7.89 billion shots apparently, that's not going to divide into 300 batches is it? That would be about 25m vials per batch, even if we were to reduce that by 10x to make it more applicable to the US only that's 2.5m vials per batch, batches are not 2.5m in number. Something has gone wrong with the numbering or was fixed, either way 300 batches isn't going to be accurate simply by handling the numbers involved roughly.
When you click the link click "I Agree" button at them bottom of the 1st page > "VAERS DATA SEARCH" button in the middle > then on the next page click any of the "SEND" buttons on the right.
and yes there are typos. Lots of them but it's obvious which ones those are.
You can check any of those lot #'s for validity at https://vaxcheck.jnj/
I'm not looking at the data wrong. There are only (about) 300 unique batch numbers, once you remove typos.(Prove me wrong.)
Due to that fact alone, you can't have an analysis that says there are 200 'safe' batches for every 'toxic' batch. (It would mean you either have one or two 'toxic' batches.)
Look at the data that comes from your search...
I'm currently looking at a region around Jun 2021, and (genuine) batch number '042A21A'. That batch number is represented dozens and dozens of ways in the database.
Each of the **'A'**s are sometimes represented as a '4' or an '8' or an 'H' (the first is a 'looks like' error, the second two are a 'sounds like' error.)
Each of the **'2'**s are sometimes changed to a 'Z'.
Sometimes people put a dash (or space or hashtag) between '042A' and '21A'. Sometimes in other places.
Sometimes some of the numbers or letters are simply left off.
Therefore, you could see "042A214", "042A -21A", "042AZ1A", "042A218", "042-A21A", "#042A21A", "042421A", "042A21H", and so on - which are all the same batch.
When you figure out how many ways this ONE batch number is represented in the database, it staggers the imagination. And each one of these 'false' batch numbers is assumed (by the video) to be a 'safe batch' because it only links to one adverse event.
The database is hopelessly 'unclean'. If you (or someone else) has a carefully cleaned version, please let me know. Without removing the 'fake' batch numbers, you cannot run an analysis.
In the search you provided, the 'largest batches' that I saw was one called 'Unknown' with 1,782 cases - and another called 'NONE' with 4,669 cases.
The truth is that (if you look at only the real batches), most have a serious ('toxic') number of links - AND you are still missing all the links that are 'lost' because they are 'spread out' among all the typos. And then, you still can't compare batch to batch unless you know that the batches are all the same size - and the CDC specifically refuses to release that data to the public.
Why are you making your argument about typos when I already said there are obvious typos? Straw-man much?
I specifically trimmed a search to make all of that obvious AND provided a way to verify WITH the manufacturer the validity of the batch # WHICH WAS TO DEAL WITH THE ARGUMENT YOU JUST MADE AGAIN IN DETAIL.
Focusing / highlighting only UNKNOW batches is just intellectually dishonest as that's not what I'm pointing to.
I spend 4 hours a day, 5 days a week in VAERS data. I know it's full of typos and I know how to look at the data and generate very tailored and specific reports.
What we can clearly see though, despite that, is REAL batches with X numbers of issues and REAL batches with XXX of issues. for J&J alone. THAT is what I was pointing to.
We can also put missing series numbers into the J&J page and see they are valid batches and hypothesize those may be saline or something neutral.
I am not offerring straw men. I see a genuine danger of having people think "Oh, there's such a really small chance that I can get a bad batch, so why not take it? I can keep my job, etc..."
The message (of 'mostly benign batches') will make no difference to those of us who will never take it, but there are those 'on the fence' who are at risk. A video like this might 'please' us, but it puts others in danger.
Nobody should take this vax.
If you are a numbers guy (like me, a programmer), you know that you can't judge how toxic a batch is unless you know both the numerator and the denominator. 'How many bad events in this batch' divided by 'how big the batch is'.
You might call this another straw man, but I don't see anywhere, in any data set, how we know the size of each batch (how much was manufactured in the batch, and how much was destroyed in the field due to expiration, etc). Pfizer and Moderna aren't telling us, and the CDC (who admits that they know) won't disclose it to the general public.
If Batch1 has 5000 bad events in VAERS, and Batch2 has only 500 - it is not valid to say that Batch2 is 'safer' unless you know the relative sizes of the batches (the denominators). What if Batch1 was 20 times as large as Batch2? Then Batch1 would actually be the safer batch - even with 10 times the events. Simple math.
Now if you know the size of each batch, of each manufacturer, and how much of each batch was actually used (not expired or discarded), please let me know how you know. I would love to have more info.
Incidentally, I made a post over a month ago that described this exact concept (doses are mostly benign/saline, with a 'fine tweaking' to produce desired results) - so I agree that they are doing this. It's just that this data does not prove it.
Post: "If they give SALINE to almost everyone (the first time around), they still get ALL of their EVIL BENEFITS. Here's how..."
Probability math is a little more complicated. If you have a 1% chance of winning and you will have 100 attempts. Your odds of winning calculated before you begin are something around 67%.
There's likely something destructive in most of them. That doctor in Canada who did a ddimer test on his patients who got the jab found that 60% of them tested positive for blood clots.
This from the Vaxx alone. Add despair, suicide. Plus what happens to the a civilizaion (tech heavy) when that many members go missing, particularly amongst the intelligencia and skilled professionals? Do you know how to run a powerplant, or an oil refinery, or do cardiac surgery, or fly an airliner?
Hopefully many quitting and getting fired do have those skills or we're fucked. The .mil trained me well so I can kill these evil bastards when its time. That much I'd be good at :-)
Hopefully. Disruption of their plans will be a big part. Thanks you for your service fren. Modern world has many moving parts and critical skills. Lot of mundane shit like running water and sewers, electricity, and comms, etc. Most are dependant and don't know how any of this works.
Last months new unemployment claims numbers were the lowest since something like 1962. We're not exactly in a bad spot right now regarding unemployment rates.
Their big problem is that too many of us figured it out too soon. Over time the vaccinated population dies off while the unvaccinated continue to thrive. So the group pushing vaccines becomes smaller and less powerful.
Trouble is that the goal of a major de-population is still achieved.
Some of the depopped will be missed, many more will not. We were not silent. We tried to warn them. We were (are) scorned and mocked. My sleep will not suffer.
The doses are likely cumulative however, so the more jabs one gets the initial survival rate likely decreases. ie. 90% first jab, 85% second, 75% third, etc... Just an example. The 'experts' likely know the real numbers.
Anon on OP’s post says “especially of whites”... this reminds me of the time when something-something replace all white people with brown people, or whatever.
Since Africa and others seem to be doing so well (see recent posts about Africa having only 3-5% vaccination rate and India giving out Ivermectin or tourists in Egypt being given an Ivermectin box on arrival or whatnot) it’d be an interesting comparison to see vax/vax death rates by country/predominant ethnicity/continent.
Could be nothing.
AndAlso: no offense intended. These (targeted) depopulation conspiracies HAVE been put forth.
Pirated from 4 chan. Ethnic cleansing component, who knows. 23 and Me, Ancestry Dot Com; where is that data going? Mapping of human genome, proteinomics, and crispr changes everything.
Get rid of the whites because they’re more apt to become indignant and uppity when trodden upon and foment rebellion, I think is what it came down to (without re-spewing the racist opposite side of the coin).
Their solution appears to be “flood their [white] countries with refugees, then convince them they need (killer/sterilizing) vaccinations”.
Yet here we are. New variants, breakthrough, pandemic of unvaccinated, etc.,etc. Once on the wrong path, few will readily deviate. Denial and withdrawl is a funny thing.
*Edit to say my math is probably retarded, but the point stands....
I watched a very interesting video from someone who analyzed the VAERS data. The vast majority of problems clustered in 1 in 200 vaccine batches.
It looked as though the companies (Pfizer, J&J and Moderna) were coordinating when the bad batches were released when he time plotted the data.
If your odds of getting a bad batch are 1 in 200, then for every subsequent shot/booster, your odds of exposure go up significantly.
1 in 200 first dose / 1 in 100 by second dose / 1 in 50 with booster / 1 in 25 on second booster and so on. By the 8th dose, your odds of getting a bad batch somewhere along the line is 1 in 1.5625 cases which means that 64% of the vaccine recipients would have had a bad batch along the way.
And the VAERS data likely doesn't even capture the long-term side effects such as damaging your immune system (HIV like) or causing cancer down the road. They primarily report immediate outcomes like strokes, myocarditis, bells palsy, etc.
That video was very seriously flawed. It's basic premise is impossible.
I downloaded the VAERS data and tried to recreate his results.
It's impossible that '1 in 200 batches' were a problem, because there are only (roughly) 300 real batch numbers.
The remaining 40,000+ (false) 'batches' are various typos, or entries like 'N/A', or 'Unknown', 'idk', etc. One-third of all the entries were simply blank. These false batches are identified as 'a huge number of safe batches', each with only one or two entries. But they don't actually exist. They are data errors.
If he removed (or corrected) all the typos, he would be left with (roughly) 300 batches -- but he would still have no way of knowing if those batches were of the same total size (and therefore analytically comparable). The CDC specifically states that it will not release that information to the public.
Just because this (very flawed) video supports our point of view, it doesn't mean we shouldn't check to see if it is a proper analysis. And it isn't.
The 600 trillion gorillion vials were contained in 300 batches? Really?
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-global-distribution/
7.89 billion shots apparently, that's not going to divide into 300 batches is it? That would be about 25m vials per batch, even if we were to reduce that by 10x to make it more applicable to the US only that's 2.5m vials per batch, batches are not 2.5m in number. Something has gone wrong with the numbering or was fixed, either way 300 batches isn't going to be accurate simply by handling the numbers involved roughly.
The 7.89 billion shots are worldwide, whereas the US is only 454 million (according to the article you referenced).
VAERS only covers the US (and only 1% to 10% of cases, by most estimates).
Therefore, the (roughly) 300 unique batch numbers that show up in the VAERS database covers between 4.5 million to 45 million shots.
That works out to a batch size of between 15,000 and 150,000 doses.
At the (false) number of 40,000 batches that exist in VAERS, that would mean each batch is between 112 and 1125 doses.
Does that sound reasonable?
You are looking at the data wrong.
While it's not 10% (currently but they can change that) there are obviously deadly batch's and it's easy to see.
I've made a sample saved search of the VAERS to show just JnJ by lot # and month. You can modify the search nut start it exactly as I have it
https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/saved/D8/D247F737
When you click the link click "I Agree" button at them bottom of the 1st page > "VAERS DATA SEARCH" button in the middle > then on the next page click any of the "SEND" buttons on the right.
and yes there are typos. Lots of them but it's obvious which ones those are. You can check any of those lot #'s for validity at https://vaxcheck.jnj/
I'm not looking at the data wrong. There are only (about) 300 unique batch numbers, once you remove typos. (Prove me wrong.)
Due to that fact alone, you can't have an analysis that says there are 200 'safe' batches for every 'toxic' batch. (It would mean you either have one or two 'toxic' batches.)
Look at the data that comes from your search...
I'm currently looking at a region around Jun 2021, and (genuine) batch number '042A21A'. That batch number is represented dozens and dozens of ways in the database.
Each of the **'A'**s are sometimes represented as a '4' or an '8' or an 'H' (the first is a 'looks like' error, the second two are a 'sounds like' error.)
Each of the **'2'**s are sometimes changed to a 'Z'.
Sometimes people put a dash (or space or hashtag) between '042A' and '21A'. Sometimes in other places.
Sometimes some of the numbers or letters are simply left off.
Therefore, you could see "042A214", "042A -21A", "042AZ1A", "042A218", "042-A21A", "#042A21A", "042421A", "042A21H", and so on - which are all the same batch.
When you figure out how many ways this ONE batch number is represented in the database, it staggers the imagination. And each one of these 'false' batch numbers is assumed (by the video) to be a 'safe batch' because it only links to one adverse event.
The database is hopelessly 'unclean'. If you (or someone else) has a carefully cleaned version, please let me know. Without removing the 'fake' batch numbers, you cannot run an analysis.
In the search you provided, the 'largest batches' that I saw was one called 'Unknown' with 1,782 cases - and another called 'NONE' with 4,669 cases.
The truth is that (if you look at only the real batches), most have a serious ('toxic') number of links - AND you are still missing all the links that are 'lost' because they are 'spread out' among all the typos. And then, you still can't compare batch to batch unless you know that the batches are all the same size - and the CDC specifically refuses to release that data to the public.
Why are you making your argument about typos when I already said there are obvious typos? Straw-man much?
I specifically trimmed a search to make all of that obvious AND provided a way to verify WITH the manufacturer the validity of the batch # WHICH WAS TO DEAL WITH THE ARGUMENT YOU JUST MADE AGAIN IN DETAIL.
Focusing / highlighting only UNKNOW batches is just intellectually dishonest as that's not what I'm pointing to.
I spend 4 hours a day, 5 days a week in VAERS data. I know it's full of typos and I know how to look at the data and generate very tailored and specific reports.
What we can clearly see though, despite that, is REAL batches with X numbers of issues and REAL batches with XXX of issues. for J&J alone. THAT is what I was pointing to.
We can also put missing series numbers into the J&J page and see they are valid batches and hypothesize those may be saline or something neutral.
Ok, simple question....
How are there '1 in 200' batches that are toxic --- if there are only (about) 300 unique batch numbers?
Another straw-man? Come on dude. Did you miss what I said originally or are you just caught up in your own argument so much that you missed it?
My position "While it's not 10% (currently but they can change that) there are obviously deadly batch's and it's easy to see."
Let me explain myself ---
I am not offerring straw men. I see a genuine danger of having people think "Oh, there's such a really small chance that I can get a bad batch, so why not take it? I can keep my job, etc..."
The message (of 'mostly benign batches') will make no difference to those of us who will never take it, but there are those 'on the fence' who are at risk. A video like this might 'please' us, but it puts others in danger.
Nobody should take this vax.
If you are a numbers guy (like me, a programmer), you know that you can't judge how toxic a batch is unless you know both the numerator and the denominator. 'How many bad events in this batch' divided by 'how big the batch is'.
You might call this another straw man, but I don't see anywhere, in any data set, how we know the size of each batch (how much was manufactured in the batch, and how much was destroyed in the field due to expiration, etc). Pfizer and Moderna aren't telling us, and the CDC (who admits that they know) won't disclose it to the general public.
If Batch1 has 5000 bad events in VAERS, and Batch2 has only 500 - it is not valid to say that Batch2 is 'safer' unless you know the relative sizes of the batches (the denominators). What if Batch1 was 20 times as large as Batch2? Then Batch1 would actually be the safer batch - even with 10 times the events. Simple math.
Now if you know the size of each batch, of each manufacturer, and how much of each batch was actually used (not expired or discarded), please let me know how you know. I would love to have more info.
Incidentally, I made a post over a month ago that described this exact concept (doses are mostly benign/saline, with a 'fine tweaking' to produce desired results) - so I agree that they are doing this. It's just that this data does not prove it.
Post: "If they give SALINE to almost everyone (the first time around), they still get ALL of their EVIL BENEFITS. Here's how..."
https://greatawakening.win/p/13zgXB5572/if-they-give-saline-to-almost-ev/
1/200= .005 or 0.5% 8 jabs 1-(199/200)^8 =0.039306… or 3.9% getting bad jab.
Probability math is a little more complicated. If you have a 1% chance of winning and you will have 100 attempts. Your odds of winning calculated before you begin are something around 67%.
There's likely something destructive in most of them. That doctor in Canada who did a ddimer test on his patients who got the jab found that 60% of them tested positive for blood clots.
This from the Vaxx alone. Add despair, suicide. Plus what happens to the a civilizaion (tech heavy) when that many members go missing, particularly amongst the intelligencia and skilled professionals? Do you know how to run a powerplant, or an oil refinery, or do cardiac surgery, or fly an airliner?
Hopefully many quitting and getting fired do have those skills or we're fucked. The .mil trained me well so I can kill these evil bastards when its time. That much I'd be good at :-)
Hopefully. Disruption of their plans will be a big part. Thanks you for your service fren. Modern world has many moving parts and critical skills. Lot of mundane shit like running water and sewers, electricity, and comms, etc. Most are dependant and don't know how any of this works.
The good news is there will be a zero unemployment rate going forward when we get on the other side of this
Last months new unemployment claims numbers were the lowest since something like 1962. We're not exactly in a bad spot right now regarding unemployment rates.
I'd check those numbers. Like MSM, a lot of the facts and figures presented to us are a fabrication.
http://www.shadowstats.com/ for more info
You'd be correct. Guys like me arent waiting around years from now
Their big problem is that too many of us figured it out too soon. Over time the vaccinated population dies off while the unvaccinated continue to thrive. So the group pushing vaccines becomes smaller and less powerful.
Trouble is that the goal of a major de-population is still achieved.
Some of the depopped will be missed, many more will not. We were not silent. We tried to warn them. We were (are) scorned and mocked. My sleep will not suffer.
if its brainwashed libs dying out that solves the problem of what do we do with e 4-6 per cent that wont ever wake up etc
The 'frog in the slow boiling pot' analogy made perfectly here.
Too much or too little doesn't work out.
The doses are likely cumulative however, so the more jabs one gets the initial survival rate likely decreases. ie. 90% first jab, 85% second, 75% third, etc... Just an example. The 'experts' likely know the real numbers.
Certainly any non placebo would likely be. Hypothesis here is 90% always get placebo.
“On a long enough time line, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.”
― Chuck Palahniuk
On their timeline the survival rate for everyone else drops to zero. Their timeline isn't that long.
Since time is their enemy, and with people waking-up, I’m thinking from here on out most batches will be poison.
Math FTW
I love it
Anon on OP’s post says “especially of whites”... this reminds me of the time when something-something replace all white people with brown people, or whatever.
Since Africa and others seem to be doing so well (see recent posts about Africa having only 3-5% vaccination rate and India giving out Ivermectin or tourists in Egypt being given an Ivermectin box on arrival or whatnot) it’d be an interesting comparison to see vax/vax death rates by country/predominant ethnicity/continent.
Could be nothing.
AndAlso: no offense intended. These (targeted) depopulation conspiracies HAVE been put forth.
Edit: autocorrect helps me sooo much
Pirated from 4 chan. Ethnic cleansing component, who knows. 23 and Me, Ancestry Dot Com; where is that data going? Mapping of human genome, proteinomics, and crispr changes everything.
why whites? thought dems and their masters hated blacks
Some racist garbage of some sort as usual.
Get rid of the whites because they’re more apt to become indignant and uppity when trodden upon and foment rebellion, I think is what it came down to (without re-spewing the racist opposite side of the coin).
Their solution appears to be “flood their [white] countries with refugees, then convince them they need (killer/sterilizing) vaccinations”.
this is neither compounding nor interest
Metaphor
If 10% of recipients die after the 1st shot, I have a feeling people will notice anyhow.
Yet here we are. New variants, breakthrough, pandemic of unvaccinated, etc.,etc. Once on the wrong path, few will readily deviate. Denial and withdrawl is a funny thing.
shrinking numerator