You said... "If you had two or more CV19 jabs, YOU HAVE DECREASED YOUR LIFE EXPECTANCY BY 37%" and will lose 30 years of life expectancy. Absolutely not true and totally misleading! This blog post should be retracted.
Read the study. Time lost unvaccinated was 7.4 days out of 739, Time lost with 2 vaccine doses was 10.1 days out of 739. T…
You said... "If you had two or more CV19 jabs, YOU HAVE DECREASED YOUR LIFE EXPECTANCY BY 37%" and will lose 30 years of life expectancy. Absolutely not true and totally misleading! This blog post should be retracted.
Read the study. Time lost unvaccinated was 7.4 days out of 739, Time lost with 2 vaccine doses was 10.1 days out of 739. The difference was 2.7 days out of 739. The 37% is simply 10.1/7.4 days. This is the same way drug and other medical studies manipulate people by showing relative risks over absolute risks. If 1 in 1000 die without a drug but only 1 in 500 die with a drug, they say it's a 50% improvement in death rate. But the % improvement is irrelevant given the low number of deaths in each case.
If the rates are even over a whole lifespan, then you would lose an extra 3.6 months, not 30 years!
In this case, people's life expectancies changed 2.7 days out of 739, or less than 1%.
Now we don't know if vaccine injuries will fade away over time, or worsen over time. But this study certainly can't tell us since we've only had vaccines 4 years. And as they point out, it's unknown why the effect is less pronounced for 3+ vaccines than for exactly 2. There's a good chance this study could not be replicated.
There is a LOT of reason to be concerned about these vaccines. Even one third of a % is a lot of humans. But let's focus on the data we actually have and not muddy the waters by misleading people with interpretations that aren't true.
I do not believe the estimates on time of life lost because it is speculation and the math is not correct. But there is every evidence of terrible health outcomes for those who took the vax jabs.
You don't have to tell me there is evidence of terrible health outcomes; I got turbocancer from the vax. But there is a gigantic differences between .37% and 37%, and telling statistical lies is not in anyone's best interest.
You said... "If you had two or more CV19 jabs, YOU HAVE DECREASED YOUR LIFE EXPECTANCY BY 37%" and will lose 30 years of life expectancy. Absolutely not true and totally misleading! This blog post should be retracted.
Read the study. Time lost unvaccinated was 7.4 days out of 739, Time lost with 2 vaccine doses was 10.1 days out of 739. The difference was 2.7 days out of 739. The 37% is simply 10.1/7.4 days. This is the same way drug and other medical studies manipulate people by showing relative risks over absolute risks. If 1 in 1000 die without a drug but only 1 in 500 die with a drug, they say it's a 50% improvement in death rate. But the % improvement is irrelevant given the low number of deaths in each case.
If the rates are even over a whole lifespan, then you would lose an extra 3.6 months, not 30 years!
In this case, people's life expectancies changed 2.7 days out of 739, or less than 1%.
Now we don't know if vaccine injuries will fade away over time, or worsen over time. But this study certainly can't tell us since we've only had vaccines 4 years. And as they point out, it's unknown why the effect is less pronounced for 3+ vaccines than for exactly 2. There's a good chance this study could not be replicated.
There is a LOT of reason to be concerned about these vaccines. Even one third of a % is a lot of humans. But let's focus on the data we actually have and not muddy the waters by misleading people with interpretations that aren't true.
I do not believe the estimates on time of life lost because it is speculation and the math is not correct. But there is every evidence of terrible health outcomes for those who took the vax jabs.
You don't have to tell me there is evidence of terrible health outcomes; I got turbocancer from the vax. But there is a gigantic differences between .37% and 37%, and telling statistical lies is not in anyone's best interest.