Buried Truth: CDC Reports More Covid Vaccine Deaths than Covid Deaths Over the Last Two Weeks

So like, looks like the poke is killing more people than the coof.

4006 poke VS 3114 coof

I would imagine that would make you much more likely to die from the poke than the coof. I believe if you are healthy or a kid, you shouldn't risk the poke. If you got issues or risk, you're foolish not to get poked.

I imagine this story is highly censored by the "protect the lab" crowd, otherwise it would be news.

https://basedunderground.com/2021/0...hs-than-covid-deaths-over-the-last-two-weeks/

 

Tin foil hat anti-vax anti-mask MORONS spamming FAKE claims of deaths to an OPEN SUBMISSION forum =/= CDC reporting deaths.

 

If covid deaths were properly reported, it would look even worse. 4006 VS 5% of 3114 or 156

 

Fake News: MIT Study: Vaccine Hesitancy Is 'Highly Informed, Scientifically "literate, and sophisticated in the use of data."

I demand a retraction.

MIT News:

VALID RATIONAL RISK BENEFIT CALCULATIONS:

As well they should.

To be fair, some of the most vocal of these folks have no other skill set than self-righteous, sickening condescension.

 

Properly reported as in with a coroners report or some official medical declaration? Why don't they have those?

 

Doctors familiar with reporting to VAERS know that under reporting is endemic.

 

LOL. I'm beginning to understand the far right. If it is written, no matter who does the writing, it must be true.

 

Then wheres the proof that unequivocally shows that the VAERS death claims are being official accepted? Because all I see is one outlet after another debunking the unverifiable anti-vaxer anti-masker nonsense.

 

That was not an answer to my question, friend.

 

Fake News. The point of the MIT Study is that the same data sets that support vaccination also support hesitancy while the data sets accumulate more information.

The point is that your "outlets" are dismissing and casting aspersions they are not wrestling with the data, whereas, the MIT study found that the vaccine hesitant are very well informed on the data. Your problem might be that you simply do not understand risk/benefit assessment. Or that you mistakenly view the vaccine as risk free, it is not. Further, as it is experimental and new, it's known hazards are still an incomplete set of it's actual hazards.

So let's start simple and build:

1. Do you view the vaccine as risk free?
2. Do you recognise differences in exposure to the risk of COVID?
3. Do you think that a young healthy cowboy with no comorbidities, working outdoors on a ranch in Wyoming, has the same risk from COVID that an elderly urban office worker, with diabetes, who lives in one high rise, works in another, commutes by bus and makes 3 commercial plane trips a month?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/17/covid-misinformation-conspiracy-theories-ccdh-report

 

I ignore links not accompanied by commentary explaining why they are pertinent to the discussion.

 

Just thought you might want to know where your information is coming from.

 

.

Earlier today I was researching death stats for Delta covid and found this:


In the UK, at least 259 people have died after contracting the delta variant of COVID-19. Of these, 116 people were fully vaccinated...

https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-do-covid-vaccines-protect-against-the-delta-variant/a-58263950

.

 

That just means we need a new vaccine for the Delta variant. And the Echo variant, and the Foxtrot Variant, and the Gamma Variant... and of course these should all be added to the schedule of vaccines we pump into infants...

 

From your link.

 

“Suggests” means they don’t know it as a fact.

 

.

When I quote actual stats... I don't like to include assumptions that begin with "probably".

.

 

Raw stats are meaningless without context.

 

Fake News. And I included the link in my initial reply to you and referred to it in my follow up reply to you. Here it is again, with an arrow as you seem to be having difficulty finding it.
|
\/
https://news.mit.edu/2021/when-more-covid-data-doesnt-equal-more-understanding-0304

 

Russia collusion…just sayin.

 

It appears you have the 'far right' confused with the 'far left'.

 

That more are dying from the shots than from the sickness is an inconvenient truth, and so the mainstream media, guardians of the official narrative, suppress the truth and do not print or talk about it.

Their Modus Operandi is pretty darn obvious.

 

If America was a free country, our media would cover every story. Not just ones ccp and Democrats want.

 

Over 90% less deaths in the vaccinated compared to the number before vaccines became available. You are still spamming every thread with a link that you do not understand. To make it easier for you from the link let's look at the deaths of the under 50s. Two of the dead were fully vaccinated, 21 of the dead were unvaccinated. Now, you may look at those figures and say the ration is 2:21. It's actually better than that because more than half of every adult age range has had at least one dose so that ratio means the 2 dead came from a larger pool of people.

Other info from page 37: 20 times more unvaccinated people under 50 were admitted to hospital.

But anyway, thanks for your spamming of a link showing how successful the vaccine has been