patrick.net

Wow!

It goes along with the spike in deaths from "rare" diseases.

Is this surprising?

When a Spiked protein shows up along a person's endothelial lining, throughout his circulatory system, along with accumulations in organs such as the spleen, liver, kidney, etc, a major reaction will occur.

That's in effect, the gift of the mRNA. It indiscriminately makes Spiked protein everywhere where there's a cell membrance which causes the body to go into defcon 3 to 1, depending upon the person.

The "control group" numbers about 200, while the vaccinated group is several orders of magnitude larger. They cannot guarantee consistent results, i.e., if they took a new control group of different people, will they have the same result? Sample sizes approaching several thousand individuals generally yield (as long as valid statistical sampling methods are employed) a highly consistent result, so long as we are measuring physical (and consequentially ergodic) phenomena and processes.

The full report reads like a political screed.

This is perhaps a Q-anon type disinformation campaign.

This paper and lawsuit seem to be against discrimination based on all kinds of vaccination, not just the jab.

Somehow I'm not too worried about traditional vaccines. They have a long history.

I'm really worried about the jab though.

Statisticians and epidemiologists raised the warning flag long before the roll out:

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/11/researchers-rush-to-start-moderna-coronavirus-vaccine-trial-without-usual-animal-testing/

I think you may be looking not at the results of the vaccination, but rather who is most likely to get vaccinated.

I'd say the infirm are most likely the ones that tend to want the vaccination. The healthy I think are much less likely to get the vaccination.

The reason for the control group being so small is that it is difficult to find adults who have received no vaccines during the course of their life.

Karloff says

The reason for the control group being so small is that it is difficult to find adults who have received no vaccines during the course of their life.

Amish is an easy group to contact, but they are quite inbred, and many of their children die in infancy because of a lack of modern medical treatment. They are often used as a control group for just vaccinations.

stereotomy says

The "control group" numbers about 200, while the vaccinated group is several orders of magnitude larger. They cannot guarantee consistent results, i.e., if they took a new control group of different people, will they have the same result? Sample sizes approaching several thousand individuals generally yield (as long as valid statistical sampling methods are employed) a highly consistent result, so long as we are measuring physical (and consequentially ergodic) phenomena and processes.

They do plan to do a follow up with a much larger group. But even with this smaller group, there are some similarities. Chronic illness is present in both groups.

For me, the bigger impact which rickwicks discussed, is what type of people are most likely to never get vaccines? I would say they are people who must be highly confident in their bodies immune system to fight off disease right? And confidence is usually a result of greater knowledge, hence I believe it's more likely people who live healthier lifestyles are less likely to get vaccinated.
But even with this as a consideration, the numbers when it comes to heart disease, chronic illness, and ear infections are so varied between the groups, it's impossible to ignore the negative impact vaccines have on people's health.

I know a lot of you want to believe in vaccines, but I'm not sure why? The vast majority of Americans are physically unhealthy, and the vast majority of Americans are vaccinated.