CDC Data & Scientific Study suggest 1.2 million Americans may already have died due to COVID Vaccination

submitted by [deleted] from (expose-news.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

Come back here. And account for this shameful shit u/bigs

Explain why you called minor soreness at the injection site "horrific"

Explain why you thought this was an important and relevant piece of information

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

Bigs clearly proposed that hiding the data was horrific, not redness at injection site. You're heavily invested in trying to prove a medical treatment to be harmless, would you do the same for other medications? Perhaps you'd like to endorse Zoloft?

[–]Site_rly_sux 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

No, you're wrong, read it again, bigs clearly said that this data

showed the injections were horrifically dangerous

When in fact all the data showed was soreness to the injection site and a short period of flu-like symptoms

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

I find the data concerning younger people potentially dangerous. Sweeping, diarrhea, vomiting and change of behaviour requiring medical attention would be deemed serious. But then if you only have data that demonstrates non fatal side effects, you will always have non fatal findings.

[–]Site_rly_sux 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Ok link to it. Because so far the only person who has linked to data here is me. So tell me what you're looking at and we can examine it together

Oh- and - do you now admit you were wrong when you said

Bigs clearly proposed that hiding the data was horrific, not redness at injection site

Because the quote I gave you above seems to prove otherwise

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Horrifically - that which is shocking.

Dangerous - that which could cause harm or injury.

I initially thought this was in response to the final comment by Bigs, but the comment you refer to would still stand up to scrutiny based on the frequency at which harm appears to have occurred. If I were to perform a risk assessment based on the data provided, I'd say that the likelihood were high for a minor injury.

[–]Site_rly_sux 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Look at the knots you're having to tie yourself in to avoid looking at actual data

minor injury

Oh - a minor injury like, my arm is sore because someone pushed a metal needle into it? Yeah I think those odds are quite high too. Most people past the age of ~12 or so can get through it without a lollipop though, not sure whether you're in that cohort

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Almost 800,000 needed medical care, 15% emergency room and 10% were hospitalised. Are you forgetting that for young people and for much older or vulnerable people, getting severe chills, fatigue, vomiting and diarrhea can be very serious?

[–]Site_rly_sux 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Am I supposed to take your word for it? Why are you so adverse to sourcing real data? Do you have an adverse effect to real data? Have you been innoculated against reality somehow

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

That's from the link you provided, or are you suggesting that I require a source that proves vulnerable people are vulnerable?