WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

363

What would a normal person do if they were leading that country? Think about it.

>What would a normal person do if they were leading that country? Think about it.

(post is archived)

[–] 0 pt (edited )

Title of "54 times the death rate " seems to be totally based on this image of another article.

Nothing else in this link references this fact.

https://i1.wp.com/journalpulp.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Screen-Shot-2022-02-13-at-9.15.18-PM.png

I have been trying and trying to trace that 54 number but it doesn't seem to be in any of references.

Going directly to the UK health office are all the vaccine effectiveness reports. I read the latest and didn't see anything like that.

Here is where you can find all of them.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports

This article seems to reference were so e of these numbers are coming from and shows they aren't correct. https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2021/12/02/vaccinated-people-england-not-dying-faster-than-unvaccinated/8821594002/

I hate the vaccine but we can't throw bad numbers around.

Can anyone anywhere actually find stats showing vaccinated kids are dying 54 x more than unvaxed?

[–] 0 pt (edited )

Yeah your right but Politfact ??/. Come on. For a start , without getting into the sleight of hand of the original using snapshot data (3 weeks) and the fact checkers comparing those data points with overall (cumulative) data for the basis of the number being incorrect (well of course it is - comparing apples to oranges), they object to the veracity bc the numbers in question are 'unadjusted' for population and are simply saying the numbers should be 'adjusted'. Total semantics and twisting statistics, yet again. Point is, both can be true depending on what parameters are used. Just more silly reporting to conflate/confuse and contain those who already don't understand the tricks the Establishment uses when presenting statistics to the uneducated public to either prove or disprove a thing - when neither may be the case. EDIT: I wouldn't even bother chasing down the 'vercity of the numbers' , bc it is simply part of the nonsense mix that is designed to weigh one down in the absurdity of the holocough ...