First, here are the two posts claiming the 5% figure:
https://greatawakening.win/p/16a9v4XS1j/5-of-covid-vax-lot-s-are-respons/c/
https://greatawakening.win/p/16a9v3RWc8/whats-in-your-wallet/c/
and two good links that I gleaned from the comments:
https://knollfrank.github.io/HowBadIsMyBatch/batchCodeTable.html
Now, assuming this 5% figure is true and that the bad batches were randomly distributed worldwide, here is the probability distribution that a person who took both clot shots and all boosters on the time scale propagandized by the government and the mockingbird media of getting a poisonous shot.
The formula for the probability distribution of 2 events is: nCrp^rq^(n-r) where n is the number of vaccine doses taken, r is the number that is poisonous, p is the probability that the batch is not poisonous which would be .95 and q is the probability that the batch is poisonous which would be .05. For those of you who are not math literate, the C is the formula for combinations.
So a person who had only one shot, the probability is nonpoisonous: 95%, poisonous 5%
From here on out, all calculations are rounded to the nearest whole percent.
A person who had two shots, the probabilities are: both nonpoisonous: 90%, 1 poisonous: 10%, both poisonous 0% (actually 0.25%)
A person who had three shots, the probabilities are: all nonpoisonous: 86%, 1 poisonous: 14%, 2 poisonous: 1%, all 3 poisonous: 0% (actually 1/80th of a %) The reason why the total is above 100% is due to rounding error.
A person who had 4 shots, the probabilities are: all nonpoisonous: 81%, 1 poisonous: 17%, 2 poisonous: 1%, 3 poisonous: 0.05%, all 4 poisonous: 1/1600 of a %
A person who had 5 shots, the probabilities are: all nonpoisonous: 77%, 1 poisonous: 20%, 2 poisonous: 2%
A person who had 6 shots, the probabilities are:
all nonpoisonous: 74%, 1 poisonous: 23%, 2 poisonous: 3%
A person who had 7 shots, the probabilities are: all nonpoisonous: 70%, 1 poisonous: 26%, 2 poisonous: 4%
A person who had 8 shots, the probabilities are:
all nonpoisonous: 66%, 1 poisonous: 28%, 2 poisonous: 5%, 3 poisonous 1%
I'll stop here since I doubt that no one has yet had 8 shots. If you look at the figures, you can see that people getting these shots are playing a game of Russian roulette with the odds increasing going against their favor. Remember though that this relies on two key assumptions made at the beginning of this post.
As you can see, a person who takes 8 shots risks a 2 out of 3 chance of NOT getting poisoned. I you presented this person with a bowl of 300 M&Ms and told them that 1 out of 3 of them was poisonous, would they reach in and take a handleful?
What got me was how the probability of getting only one poisonous shot out of many rose with each shot taken. After all, it only takes one to cause an injury or death. I'm sure that others here on GAW can add other interpretations of these numbers and I welcome them to do so. I just wanted to throw this out there are continue the discussion that was started yesterday.
Good work. Let's hope your assumptions are correct. Dr. Ryan Cole has made the point that batches could have also been effected by temperature and storage. MRNA components are rendered ineffective with heat - shown by early claims the VAXXX must be kept very cold. If your (VAXXXT) batch sat in the trunk of someone's car in the heat --- you may get to live.
Thanks for the compliment. The assumptions were not my own but were made by the articles I linked.
Yup. I'm wondering if even distribution of VAXXX actually happened. Evidence seems to show the worst batches went to red states -- of course. That would maximize evil. Thanks for the informative post.
There's also a theory that the adverse effects are actually fairly uniform, but the reporting of them isn't. Since red states are less likely to cover up adverse events, you would see more of them being reported from there.
That is correct. Let's remember that all these probabilities are based upon original data that was derived from the VAERS system, which is already flawed and only captures a small percentage of vaxxine side effects. The vast majority of vaxxine injury does not get reported. Even though this data can give us an indication as far as signals, it should not be used to extrapolate overall safety numbers as far as risk. That could give the impression that the safety profile is much better than what the reality is. Data that would give us better risk evaluations is being held internally by either the government or the drug companies. But, this piece of a much larger picture that we do have, no matter how flawed, is a signal of harm that is damning and should not be discounted.
Does that then mean that the bad batches are double what was reported -- 10% instead of 5%?
Good point. Damn, lots of war fog.
I believe the distribution was uneven. I feel like the WEF allowed the leaders in the cabinets they had penetrated to choose how many of their populous would be sacrificed to the climate agenda. Maybe they had to draw straws and the short straws got bad batches who knows. Trudeau acting like Canadians owe him something like he did us all a favor. It may come out in the future when he is facing the music that he negotiated that Canada would be mostly spared from the depop.
Time to start building gallows.