(02-23-2024, 12:34 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2024, 12:22 PM)snarkyguy_he_him_his Wrote: [ -> ]Vaccines should be a choice. Even in the medical industry.
They trust N95s so much that should have been enough for a short lived airborne virus.
It is a choice, you can choose not to work there if you disagree with the terms.
Sure, I guess that makes sense since college is free now. Also, years of data is different than relevant data. Show me age-specific data that confirms what you claim. You can't.
It's not round and round. There's no other side to this. Do you guys know the difference between age-adjusted and age-specific metrics? Do you know why that matters?
(02-23-2024, 01:59 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2024, 12:34 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]It is a choice, you can choose not to work there if you disagree with the terms.
Sure, I guess that makes sense since college is free now. Also, years of data is different than relevant data. Show me age-specific data that confirms what you claim. You can't.
It's not round and round. There's no other side to this. Do you guys know the difference between age-adjusted and age-specific metrics? Do you know why that matters?
Because you have nothing to dispute without them?
(02-23-2024, 12:38 PM)snarkyguy_he_him_his Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2024, 12:34 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]It is a choice, you can choose not to work there if you disagree with the terms.
No savings, living paycheck to paycheck, the Phillipino nurse whose family has a history of heart disease, gets the vaccine.... she never gets COVID but she 'dies suddenly'. At least she doesn't have family here to question why.
Oh good, another replay of that fallacy.
(02-23-2024, 02:06 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2024, 01:59 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Sure, I guess that makes sense since college is free now. Also, years of data is different than relevant data. Show me age-specific data that confirms what you claim. You can't.
It's not round and round. There's no other side to this. Do you guys know the difference between age-adjusted and age-specific metrics? Do you know why that matters?
Because you have nothing to dispute without them?
Well, sure... yeah... I guess you're right. If there were no such thing as specific vs adjusted data, I guess I wouldn't have anything to complain about. Got me there, boss. Now you want to address the difference and why it's important when making decisions?
Age-adjusted information skews the data. True or untrue?
You know what, scratch that. Let's just pretend I'm a giant dummy. If you were a statistician, why would you use age-adjusted rates? What information does that tell you? Help me understand.
(02-23-2024, 05:55 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You know what, scratch that. Let's just pretend I'm a giant dummy. If you were a statistician, why would you use age-adjusted rates? What information does that tell you? Help me understand.
I'm not a statistician or interested in helping you understand.
Lol. You mean you don't know what you're talking about. Look at the leaders of our healthcare system... not interested in helping us simpletons something.
(02-23-2024, 08:06 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Lol. You mean you don't know what you're talking about. Look at the leaders of our healthcare system... not interested in helping us simpletons something.
I don’t pretend to know more than I do. You've attributed something to me that I don't accept, and that's on you
(02-23-2024, 09:29 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2024, 08:06 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Lol. You mean you don't know what you're talking about. Look at the leaders of our healthcare system... not interested in helping us simpletons something.
I don’t pretend to know more than I do. You've attributed something to me that I don't accept, and that's on you
If you don't know the difference between those terms, then how can you understand the reason it skews the data? Those distinctions are necessary to making informed decisions. Saying you don't pretend to know more than you know is not an excuse for making claims that are unverifiable. The CDC is not releasing the data that would actually support their claims, and you of all people should question why that's the case. You're a leader in Healthcare, but your only appeal is to authority.
If I take the time to write the distinction, would you consider what I'm writing instead of reflexively dismissing why it's important? This is what I'm getting at when you feel attacked by me. I don't feel like you're even trying to use your brain, man.
(02-24-2024, 12:10 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2024, 09:29 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I don’t pretend to know more than I do. You've attributed something to me that I don't accept, and that's on you
If you don't know the difference between those terms, then how can you understand the reason it skews the data? Those distinctions are necessary to making informed decisions. Saying you don't pretend to know more than you know is not an excuse for making claims that are unverifiable. The CDC is not releasing the data that would actually support their claims, and you of all people should question why that's the case. You're a leader in Healthcare, but your only appeal is to authority.
If I take the time to write the distinction, would you consider what I'm writing instead of reflexively dismissing why it's important? This is what I'm getting at when you feel attacked by me. I don't feel like you're even trying to use your brain, man.
I didn't say I don't understand, I said I don't pretend to know more than I know. You don't know that the data isn't considered, you just know that YOU don't know it. That's my issue, you make claims from your own lack of information. I can't solve that for you.
(02-23-2024, 11:37 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2024, 11:28 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]So everything forever after is about the Covid vaccine I guess?
Protein supplements first hit the market 75 years ago.
That study was published Feb 2024, should they ignore it?
The problem with doctors, scientists and the whole industry is the problem we have with everything. Money is all that matters.
Lead was "safe" according to science until one guy decided to fight that lie.
Fat was considered the worst thing for your heart - thanks to the sugar industry PAYING for those results. Now we know it's sugar.
(02-24-2024, 12:30 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2024, 11:37 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Protein supplements first hit the market 75 years ago.
That study was published Feb 2024, should they ignore it?
So MSM pushing all of the new things that "can affect the heart" all of a sudden discovered within the same time period as a "vaccine" that knowingly causes myocarditis is all coincidental?
The intent is to introduce doubt to vaccine related death autopsies. To continue to carry water for your industry after what they did to the country is crazy.
(02-24-2024, 12:17 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (02-24-2024, 12:10 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]If you don't know the difference between those terms, then how can you understand the reason it skews the data? Those distinctions are necessary to making informed decisions. Saying you don't pretend to know more than you know is not an excuse for making claims that are unverifiable. The CDC is not releasing the data that would actually support their claims, and you of all people should question why that's the case. You're a leader in Healthcare, but your only appeal is to authority.
If I take the time to write the distinction, would you consider what I'm writing instead of reflexively dismissing why it's important? This is what I'm getting at when you feel attacked by me. I don't feel like you're even trying to use your brain, man.
I didn't say I don't understand, I said I don't pretend to know more than I know. You don't know that the data isn't considered, you just know that YOU don't know it. That's my issue, you make claims from your own lack of information. I can't solve that for you.
You're the one making the claim, dude. You literally just posted here, in this thread (among multiple others) that the vaccine makes every age group safer. Here, let me refresh your memory:
(02-22-2024, 01:45 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (02-22-2024, 12:48 PM)Hurricane Wrote: [ -> ]But weren't all the non-vaccinated suppose to die to covid? Thats the fear they put in everyones head when they were counting all the deaths and blaming covid regardless of the underlining issue.
All? No, but a whole lot did, and the vaccines helped that number be less.
(02-22-2024, 09:11 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (02-22-2024, 04:32 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]For whom? Which demographic?
All of them. Every one.
I've been repeatedly asking you to show me where you got that information for the last two years. You haven't. You've posted some age-adjusted metrics which are irrelevant to that claim. You can NOT state the level of vaccine efficacy across age groups because you don't KNOW it. That information has not been released. Therefore, YOU are the one making a claim from your own lack of information. Don't try to gaslight me, bro.
It's not complicated. Just admit you can't provide anything to support your claim, then kindly shut the [BLEEP] up. I'm trying hard to respect you, bro, but it's getting harder and harder watching our healthcare break because people like you don't have either the backbone or the knowledge to hold our institutions to account.
Does anyone else here know why that's important to draw a distinction between age-adjusted and age-specific? Or does it sound like I'm bleating on about something insignificant?