TJ Garland <[email protected]> wrote:
<<<<Why would public health officials, who know better, go along with the false
>and misleading 4% death rate from SARS errantly established on this
>inappropriate summing of ?confirmed? and ?suspected? SARS ?cases??>>>>>>>>>>
><<<<<<Level 5: Genius Level
If far more than 99.99% of people infected with SARS get well on their own, how
did they manage to do that without government involvement?>>>>>>>>>>
A lot of what was said makes sense and the stat's are very much
misleading how do you say 99.99% of people infected get well on there own but
there's a 4% death rate, that equals 103.99%. so what's the total percent used
in the stat's you would think it was out of a 100%. Maybe I missed something?
Well according to a friend of mine who retired as vice president of a
pharmaceutical company, says we won't need CS or any anti-biotic medication in
15 years. And this whole sars thing is a part of the ploy along with west nile
(Food for thought: How does a mosquito bite a bird who's feathers are layered
like shingles on a roof and why was it always a crow?). When the idea
first came about to do biological engineering (makeing super humans) he was one
of the first scientist's working on it, but back then there was a lack of
funding but now they're funding is unlimited. So in fifteen years all the
technology will have been completed and any problem like aids, CF, hepatitas,
etc. will be able to be cured by adjusting your DNA strand. Then he said " But
only if you CAN live to make it for 15 years." I wonder what he was was
implying.??
Jay
PJAY
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
