Categories
Uncategorized

Clear Messaging

Yesterday's conversation continues. 

Sean Stinson

So far the main difference between the virus and the poxine is the virus only kills the elderly.


Jay Hall
Source?

Corinne Fornow
https://giphy.com/gifs/everyone-over-account-rbzLgG9VR0QMw

Pierre Potgieter
For the average healthy person the chances of dying from the virus, are the same as dying from the poxine. So, they’ve effectively doubled our chances of dying.

Sean Stinson 438 dead in Europe after taking the poxine.

David Haswell Many more.

Jay Hall
What was the cause of death? If you gave 10 million people a vegemite sandwich, and of those say 3 million were in aged care homes, and say 438 died, would you ban vegemite?

Rob Snyder


there are many things I would do before banning the Vegemite sandwich. First I’d use a PCR test on 20% of the population every 5 weeks to detect a molecular fragment of any of the ingredients of the Vegemite sandwich. Then I’d order the population to stand 2 meters apart to reduce transmission of those molecules through respiration. Then I’d close businesses and schools and prohibit gatherings. Then I’d inject gene modification products into everyone to reduce symptoms of those infected with vegemite sandwich particles. And only then, after doing everything possible to mitigate Vegemite sandwich infection, I would enhance all of these measures, strengthen and continue them as long as it takes to eliminate all molecular evidence of Vegemite sandwiches, Zero Vegemite. so that none of this has to happen again (with regard to Vegemite sandwiches)

Sean Stinson
you win the internet today.

Jay Hall
well I must admit, it was a cool reply. But, has anyone answered the core thrust in a numerical and un emotive manner? I mean name calling is one thing , but numbers are another

Jay Hall
and I must retire, thank you for the memories folks

Rob Snyder
I live in Sweden. A Swede analyzed numbers here https://softwaredevelopmentperestroika.wordpress.com/2021/01/15/final-report-on-swedish-mortality-2020-anno-covid/ 

This was said by a friend yesterday and will have to be understood eventually. Otherwise we’ll be isolating, locking down, masking, and injecting ourselves every year, permanently:

Seems to me that vaccinations, which may or may not turn out to positively affect average life expectancy in the context of viral pandemic, are to be seen in terms of a panacea. The problem that they purport to solve is actually unsolvable in principle since it is mortality itself and the effect of the law of diminishing returns of medical technologies applied in advanced capitalist societies characterised by an aging population and falling birth rate.

Thomas Beavitt

Jay Hall
But for real, correlation Does not equal causality. No matter how much really want it to

Sean Stinson
it did when old people with multiple comorbidities were dying from the virus. 


https://softwaredevelopmentperestroika.wordpress.com/2021/01/15/final-report-on-swedish-mortality-2020-anno-covid/ 

Perfectly reasonable questions. Also necessary.

There is nothing complex in answering them. Only the will to answer them and apply the most minimal of functional reasoning.

1. Which years among the last 120 years should Sweden NOT have been locked down, masked, and injected, if Sweden should have been locked down, masked, and injected in 2020?

2. For the next 120 years (until the year 2141), what is the target mortality rate that would justify lifting the restrictions — that should have been imposed in 2020 and 114 of the last 120 years that had a higher death rate than 2020 — ending lockdown, masking, and injections?

Jay Hall
interesting read, thanks, very detailed analysis. It certainly acknowledged some poor decisions in state infrastructure investment but does not discuss vaccination related mortality rates.

Rob Snyder
it’s an analysis of 2020 mortality data in Sweden. Vaccinations were not administered for Covid in 2020.

Rob Snyder
I ask 2 questions:

1. Which years among the last 120 years should Sweden NOT have been locked down, masked, and injected, if Sweden should have been locked down, masked, and injected in 2020?

2. For the next 120 years, through 2141, what is the target mortality rate that would justify lifting the restrictions — that should have been imposed in 2020 and 114 of the last 120 years that had a higher death rate — ending lockdown, masking, and injections?

114 of the last 120 years were deadlier than 2020 in Sweden (deaths per population).

The 6 years of the last 120 that were less deadly (slightly) than 2020 were 2014, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 2019.

2019 was the least deadly year in Sweden in the last 120 years, and possibly the least deadly ever in the history of Sweden. 2020 is slightly higher, a bit less than 2013.

2020 death rate in Sweden is near all time low

Jay Hall
Those are good questions for which I do not have the answer. Is it possible that there are.multiple factors related to the death rate in 2020 some of which may have even been related to lockdown( I’m thinking say automobile deaths, etc) not really where I was coming from in originally responding to an assertion regarding vaccine deaths though

Jay Hall
that is exactly my point in the context of discussion related to Sean’s post

Jay Hall
Oops, my comment above was in response to yours acknowledging it did not include vaccination stats

Rob Snyder
there are no vaccination stats for 2020 in Sweden because no Covid vaccination was done in 2020.

Your point about possible reduction in auto fatalities in Sweden in 2020 due to reduced driving resulting from increased work from home because of C19 policy may be true. But a small effect. Only about 300 people die per year in car crashes in Sweden 

https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2014/02/26/why-sweden-has-so-few-road-deaths

Even a reduction of 100% would not be very significant in all-cause mortality of over 90,000 deaths per year.

Jay Hall
that was just a basic what if there are also other factors related to reduction, sorry if it seemed like I was claiming a fact. I’ll just ask that you see the op statement and provide some objective evidence of the claim that covid vaccination is causing more deaths than th e virus, without ad hominem if possible

Rob Snyder
“without ad hominem if possible”. That’s an ad hominem. You understand that. Right? I have not attacked your person, your motivations. You just implied that I did. That’s an ad hominem. A smear.

Rob Snyder
A variation of the loaded question… “have you stopped beating your wife?”, contains within it an unwarranted assumption (presumption of guilt) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question

This is like the Covid narrative itself.

An entire population should receive experimental injections, not because of demonstrably abnormal illness or death rates, but because “vaccine hesitancy” is a symptom of anti-social psychopathy.

“You should be vaccinated because not doing so indicates narcissistic personality disorder”

The loaded question (manipulative) nature of C19 narrative deserves a great deal more scrutiny.

Likewise, Covid vaccination harm (injury, death) warrants continuous scrutiny. Adverse Reaction databases that actually are made available (not hidden or obfuscated) over the coming weeks and months will provide some insight, no doubt.

Rob Snyder
Jay Hall, your comment —- “”that was just a basic what if there are also other factors related to reduction, sorry if it seemed like I was claiming a fact. I’ll just ask that you see the op statement and provide some objective evidence of the claim that covid vaccination is causing more deaths than th e virus, without ad hominem if possible”” —- contained ad hominem, loaded question, and straw man logic distortions. The straw man is your claim that the original post claimed that “Covid vaccination is causing more deaths than the virus itself”.

That certainly is not the claim made in the original post, which says:

“So far the main difference between the virus and the poxine is the virus only kills the elderly.”


Jay Hall
Yeah, that was a general request and I can see how it may have been taken that way, sorry. Your reply was straightforward

Jay Hall
And yes , I’ve just scrolled back up and realised I took another assertion not made by Sean regarding the chances of dying from the vaccine relative to dying from the virus, which is wildly innacurate.

Jay Hall
I will be watching with more than a passing interest how the vaccine impacts people, as I expect that I will be likely getting one myself sometime later this year. But while I will be cautious, I’m not really concerned that there’s any deep state/ nanobot / DNA modification agenda going on. It interests me how far some of the reactions go at the moment.

Sean Stinson
the mRNA vaxxines are DNA altering by definition,. The Deep State Nano Bots may be optional.

Sean Stinson
Did I say deep state nanobots? I meant gay frog autism nanobots.

Jay Hall
apparently not, but it does sound cool to say they do, adds a real spooky overtone to the narrative.

Jay Hall
This conversation timeline is wayyy fragmented , literally would do a halfway sane person to madness. Fo the record, I can state as follows

1) I do not believe claims that the vac is intended to alter our DNA

2) I am interested but not deeply afraid over the number and type of adverse reactions reported, and shall read on before I get myself and family jabbed

3) I just want to go snowboarding in Japan next year, and I’ll take my gay frog autism nanobots if that gets me there, then die quietly to keep bill gates happy, on the condition that it happens after my holiday

Rob Snyder
on 1, I think it’s best to listen to Bill Gates himself. Whatever mRNA vaccines are, Gates calls the technology a “platform”, which means exactly what he says next: it’s a space where more vaccines will be developed continuously:

https://twitter.com/BillGates/status/1356374923078369281?s=20

When we accept being compelled to be vaccinated against what effectively is mortality itself (normal mortality), we’re signing up for continuous injections rolled out from this platform. The platform includes not only the technology, but also the narrative/messaging production, and the media, regulatory, governing authorities control apparatus (corruption).

It may be worthwhile to take note of Bill Gates’ abiding interest in “platforms”: https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/24/18715202/microsoft-bill-gates-android-biggest-mistake-interview

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates has been reflecting on his time at the company when crucial decisions were made over its mobile operating system. During a recent interview at Village Global, a venture capital firm, Gates revealed his “greatest mistake ever” was Microsoft missing the Android opportunity:

“In the software world, particularly for platforms, these are winner-take-all markets. So the greatest mistake ever is whatever mismanagement I engaged in that caused Microsoft not to be what Android is. That is, Android is the standard non-Apple phone platform. That was a natural thing for Microsoft to win. It really is winner take all. If you’re there with half as many apps or 90 percent as many apps, you’re on your way to complete doom. There’s room for exactly one non-Apple operating system and what’s that worth? $400 billion that would be transferred from company G to company M.”

https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/24/18715202/microsoft-bill-gates-android-biggest-mistake-interview


Jay Hall
I’ll check that out tomorrow, cheers. But I did look at the report on adverse reactions this evening provided in this link, seems not really scary.

Rob Snyder
I’d like to watch the data for confirmation of Pierre Potgieter’s comment: “For the average healthy person the chances of dying from the virus, are the same as dying from the poxine. So, they’ve effectively doubled our chances of dying.”

That’s different from your characterization. In fact, the data shows uncontroversially, that the chance of dying from the virus, for average healthy people — excluding people who are at or near or beyond age of life expectancy (median age of Covid death in Sweden is 2 years older than Swedish life expectancy) — is very low, the chance exceedingly small. It is reasonable to ask if rate of death from the mRNA pharma product will reach similar levels.

If so, which is not unlikely as the number of c19 deaths among average healthy people is exceedingly small, then Pierre’s assertion is correct.

Jay Hall
we’ve got a pretty good dataset, 132m doses, death rate minimal in comparison, health workers etc could be considered the healthy test group ? I’m not convinced,

Rob Snyder
you might consider it worthwhile to doubt the adverse affects reports from the pharma companies themselves, and others. For example, deaths are likely under reported because they’re classified as Covid deaths. There are a whole range of serious scientific questions that would have to be applied scientifically in evaluating all of it. That work is largely not being done. To cut short: science is corrupted. Extensively.

Rob Snyder
Likewise, it’s still very early. What happens to people a year later, 3, 5, 10 years later? You take the mRNA pharma product now and you make yourself an uninformed participant in a clinical trial. And you’ll be taking another injection set next year, and the year after, and..

Jay Hall
I understood that the adverse incidents come from public health reporting? They are the ones administering and collating the info now? And bear in mind that not all internet forum traffic on the subject is objective. There is a level of scrutiny on this that has never before been seen. And yet we all get access to near real time reporting of incidents that send some folk into a massive spin and discussion threads that are more based in hysteria than reality

Jay Hall
YES we do not have long term studies, fair point.

Rob Snyder
there is persuasive documentation of the corruption of public health authorities. They just follow directives from the WHO and whatever the apparatus is that drives all of this. They classify deaths in the way that they’re told to do so. And those directives have been seen. Many are published. Actual journalists have done the job of sorting through the effects. But they’re marginalized as “conspiracy theorists”, their work ignored. One of many analyses: https://off-guardian.org/2020/05/05/covid-19-is-a-statistical-nonsense/ 


Rob Snyder
Likewise, contrary to mainstream reporting, clinical trials have not been completed: https://off-guardian.org/2021/01/03/what-vaccine-trials/

Rob Snyder
The Bill Gates’ video from the other day is only about 90 seconds long. He’s got well crafted messaging there. He tells you really everything you need to know: https://twitter.com/BillGates/status/1356374923078369281?s=20

And I think the comment from Thomas Beavitt is the clearest interpretation I’ve seen yet and will have to be understood eventually. Otherwise we will be isolating, locking down, masking, and injecting ourselves every year, permanently:

“Seems to me that vaccinations, which may or may not turn out to positively affect average life expectancy in the context of viral pandemic, are to be seen in terms of a panacea. The problem that they purport to solve is actually unsolvable in principle since it is mortality itself and the effect of the law of diminishing returns of medical technologies applied in advanced capitalist societies characterised by an aging population and falling birth rate.”

Thomas Beavitt

We’re not confronted with science. We’re confronted with what the former editor in chief of The New England Journal of Medicine describes above.

Corruption.

Total.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s