From a purely objective look at the above graphic, it appears that two different "sources" are used. The graphs on the right are purportedly from the CDC, while the text on the left is an interpretation by someone else. Use of non-technical terms like "vaxxed" and "unvaxxed" suggest this is not from a study but a personal interpretation.
I'm not disputing the content of the text, just wanting to know who did the analysis? It's quite likely the interpretation is correct, or CLOSE to correct, but can we have more transparency and analysis on this?
That is what the Deep State wants: work you in your prime, early death so as not to collect SS or be a burden upon society. Depopulation agenda via stillbirths, infertility (from Covid shots, numerous childhood vaccines, oral contraceptives), the air we breathe, the water we drink, the chemicals in the clothing we wear and the food we eat. Say NO to all vaccines, buy grass fed/ grass finished and free range food/dairy, grow your own fruits and vegetables, filter your water via Berkey, etc.
It'll take at least a couple more years for insurance data to catch up. Right now they're still going off what the pharma industry tells them.
Something similar happened when statins (and blood pressure medicine in general) began to be heavily prescribed: for a while insurance rates stayed the same, but now anyone over 50 that gets prescribed blood pressure medicine has their insurance premium climb because that prescription in that age bracket is associated with early death.
I'll probably never understand how medical doctors manage to sleep at night, or how they managed to convince entire generations that the human body pushes butter directly into the veins. That's how they purport it at least. But always without any suggested mechanism for how the body processes dietary fat into calcium (the main constituent of cholesterol).
Cholesterol in the blood vessels is used to repair damage in the absence of the body's preferred repair tool: vitamin c, so I'm not at all surprised to learn it has an important role in brain function.
Have life insurance rates actually gone up yet for those who are jabbed? Are they even asking that question yet?
Hubby just got new life Insurance and wasn't asked anything. And rates are low.
They are saying "tell your doctor if you are vaccinated or plan to be" in drug ads now. At the end where they talk fast about the potential side effects
Lotsa 25s today. Something going on with the 25th amendment that we're not seeing? Apparently Donald applied some Payne today and a pawn was sacrificed in the Game of Thrones. Is that it?
Trying to make sense of the math...
Suppose 100 people out of 10,000 (1%) of a certain demographic (i.e. middle age men) died in 2021. This is saying that, in 2022, 107 would die if all had one Schwab Shot, and 135 deaths (1.35%) if they all had 5 shots?
But that is only one year, so the commenter is extrapolating that rate to every subsequent year, which is not supported... yet. While a pureblood cohort would expect to have 5,000 still alive at 80 years old, due to the (generally increasing) death rate, a cohort of sheep would be halved by age 55 due to the accelerated death rate.
Do I understand that correctly?
For those curious,
e^(-0.014x50) = 50%
Pureblood 30yo, living for 50 years, with annual mortality of 1.4%.
e^(-0.0189x35) = 52%
5 shots (1.4 * 1.35 = 1.89), living to 55yo.
Pure blood living for 59 more years if he is 30 today so to 80. Baseline life expectancy scamdemic.
5-shot living to 55 at the oldest
The 35% increase in mortality can/should be look at like the 100 year storm.
With 5-shots you are 35% more likely to die this year than had you not complied. If you don't die, you're still 35% more likely to die next year than had you not complied. The bass is baggage that you carry with you the rest of your shortened life. The 25% reduction is probably the modal center of the increased death calculations, hence the 55 at the oldest. Some, not most will live past 55 and your insurance rates will reflect this.
From a purely objective look at the above graphic, it appears that two different "sources" are used. The graphs on the right are purportedly from the CDC, while the text on the left is an interpretation by someone else. Use of non-technical terms like "vaxxed" and "unvaxxed" suggest this is not from a study but a personal interpretation.
I'm not disputing the content of the text, just wanting to know who did the analysis? It's quite likely the interpretation is correct, or CLOSE to correct, but can we have more transparency and analysis on this?
Excellent insight. Thanks. I hope we see the source and either validate or refine this.
Still ---- we all need to print this out and give a copy to our local head pharmacist.
That is what the Deep State wants: work you in your prime, early death so as not to collect SS or be a burden upon society. Depopulation agenda via stillbirths, infertility (from Covid shots, numerous childhood vaccines, oral contraceptives), the air we breathe, the water we drink, the chemicals in the clothing we wear and the food we eat. Say NO to all vaccines, buy grass fed/ grass finished and free range food/dairy, grow your own fruits and vegetables, filter your water via Berkey, etc.
And your insurance premiums go up because you complied.
It'll take at least a couple more years for insurance data to catch up. Right now they're still going off what the pharma industry tells them.
Something similar happened when statins (and blood pressure medicine in general) began to be heavily prescribed: for a while insurance rates stayed the same, but now anyone over 50 that gets prescribed blood pressure medicine has their insurance premium climb because that prescription in that age bracket is associated with early death.
And Alzheimer’s.
Cholesterol is necessary to keep the brain working.
I'll probably never understand how medical doctors manage to sleep at night, or how they managed to convince entire generations that the human body pushes butter directly into the veins. That's how they purport it at least. But always without any suggested mechanism for how the body processes dietary fat into calcium (the main constituent of cholesterol).
Cholesterol in the blood vessels is used to repair damage in the absence of the body's preferred repair tool: vitamin c, so I'm not at all surprised to learn it has an important role in brain function.
Have life insurance rates actually gone up yet for those who are jabbed? Are they even asking that question yet? Hubby just got new life Insurance and wasn't asked anything. And rates are low.
They are saying "tell your doctor if you are vaccinated or plan to be" in drug ads now. At the end where they talk fast about the potential side effects
How Manny people have sourced new policies?
The rates will really accelerate as 30yos approach 55.
The intention being that those policies are let to lapse and the insurance co keeps the premiums.
Everyone's rates go up because they complied.
And when Ai replaces a lot of people in the workforce, they won’t have “useless eaters”, which will be in the millions, surviving off of welfare.
Lotsa 25s today. Something going on with the 25th amendment that we're not seeing? Apparently Donald applied some Payne today and a pawn was sacrificed in the Game of Thrones. Is that it?
There you go! If that doesn’t speak volumes I don’t know what does
Trying to make sense of the math...
Suppose 100 people out of 10,000 (1%) of a certain demographic (i.e. middle age men) died in 2021. This is saying that, in 2022, 107 would die if all had one Schwab Shot, and 135 deaths (1.35%) if they all had 5 shots?
But that is only one year, so the commenter is extrapolating that rate to every subsequent year, which is not supported... yet. While a pureblood cohort would expect to have 5,000 still alive at 80 years old, due to the (generally increasing) death rate, a cohort of sheep would be halved by age 55 due to the accelerated death rate.
Do I understand that correctly?
For those curious,
e^(-0.014x50) = 50%
Pureblood 30yo, living for 50 years, with annual mortality of 1.4%.
e^(-0.0189x35) = 52%
5 shots (1.4 * 1.35 = 1.89), living to 55yo.
clarification
Pure blood living for 59 more years if he is 30 today so to 80. Baseline life expectancy scamdemic.
5-shot living to 55 at the oldest
The 35% increase in mortality can/should be look at like the 100 year storm. With 5-shots you are 35% more likely to die this year than had you not complied. If you don't die, you're still 35% more likely to die next year than had you not complied. The bass is baggage that you carry with you the rest of your shortened life. The 25% reduction is probably the modal center of the increased death calculations, hence the 55 at the oldest. Some, not most will live past 55 and your insurance rates will reflect this.