On 12/19/2022 11:08 PM, [email protected] wrote:
The language is Hindi I believe.
That's all you've got say about your Champion.
There are others looking at the vaccines more carefully than you and
John.
Advocacy journalism follows:
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/fda-study-covid-vaccine-blood-clot-elderly-et/
Core report:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X22014931
Typical bad medical statistics. They set a threshold for significance
of 1% false positive, but then applied it to 14 different "outcomes".
If there's a 1% chance of error that's 99% chance of no error...on each
test. So the probability of finding at least one false positive is
0.99^14=0.869 or 13%.
And what is the only "outcome" they identified as significant: Pulmonary
embolism in in the inpatient setting. In other words vaccinated persons
who were also inpatients had a significantly higher risk of PE. Don't
suppose it could have anything to do with lying prone a lot, or being in
a hospital with other sick people.
Counter argument-
DeSantis' anti-vax grand jury petition suggests that a rise in
cardiac-related mortality in young people might be caused by vaccines.
Of course, if you actually look at the study, you'll
see—shockingly—that the rise predates vaccination. Because it's mostly
due to COVID itself.
I am willing to find out whether it (the vax) does or does not present
a danger to a minority of the public.
Define "danger". One in chance in a thousand? ten thousand? hundred
thousand?
Bhattacharya is a prof at Stanford and that is one thing neither you
nor I are.
And I know statistics which neither you nor he do.
For the democrat practice of character assassination (which work great
for your team members but not ours) there is Professor Makary, at
Johns Hopkins, who sides with Bhattacharya.
Oh well, now I'm really impressed there's some other guy who's taken
sides. Too bad nobody has an argument or data.
@JohnsHopkins <https://twitter.com/JohnsHopkins>
professor,
@theNAMedicine <https://twitter.com/theNAMedicine>
member,
@harvardchansph <https://twitter.com/harvardchansph>
alum, author of 2 NYT bestselling books. Honest debate is healthy, I
can be persuaded
"Lancet study of Covid+ and - teens found “poor well-being, fatigue &
Long COVID were broadly similar” but loneliness increased steadily.
Take home message—Long-covid is not the mass disabling complication
that has permanently damaged a generation of children, social
isolation is."
All I want is to find out so as to save lives.
If that were true you'd be advocating that all the unvaccinated
Trumpkins get vaccinations.
It would seem that practicing public health should be adjustable to
discoveries in medical science.
Seems sensible at first blush. Unless there are underlying financial
or obsessive-compulsive disorders happening?
Or, more directly to your flavor of your discussions: (Get Ready..)
If ya want Trump back, this is how ya get More Trump!!! (Laughter
placed here) :" Bwah ha hah hah hah...."
Meanwhile,in a home in Florida-DeSantis Saves, Jesus too? Moses
Invests, & Elvis Surfs
Meaning, if you wish to hurt DeSantis and now you may be on Don's side
in this, you won't hurt his chances by focusing on his grand jury
move. He'd have to look weak against Newsome of Cal. The only thing
Newsome has going for him is that he has been far, more, active, than
Joe-Kamala on Renewable energy. How significant in 24 will this be, we
have way of knowing now. As one dem pollster said back on November
10th, if DeSantis can beat Trump in the primaries, there is no one on
the Democratic side that can beat him.
And they're saying De Sanctimonious has no chance against The Stable Genius.
Why do you bother to type this made up shit?
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/980e68b1-6f41-7dde-71af-4576cc0f9bd5%40gmail.com.
