Doshi's critique in the Fall of 2020 was the nail in the trial coffin for me. From that point on I had no hesitation advising ALL my patients of whatever group against taking the soon to be mandated shots. The transparently fraudulent trials themselves were sufficient to convince me of the malfeasance on display. No peer review, no data just press releases, no explanation for 3000+ suspected cases "unconfirmed" or lost to follow up. The icing on the cake was prematurely unblinding and crossing over because of the "ethical" obligation to offer the "vaccine" to the control group. The last maneuver is the oldest and most transparent trick in the trial book. It makes me furious to recall the episode.
How To Lie With Statistics (by Darryl Huff) received a Bill Gates’ thumbs up, and was a book he highly recommended.
I wonder why. And is it required reading for all employees with the Gates Foundation, GAVI, and all his other tax shelters .
Covid infection (projection) models and vaccine efficacy appears to be suffering from a serious data problem - caused by heavy leaning, on the wrong side , of the numbers scale .
I think I first heard about Darryl Huff's book being recommended by David Friedman (the physicist, economics professor and law professor) around 2012.
Maybe it is a false memory of mine.
The suprebrains know about cheating with numbers and they also get bamboozled. The bamboozle comes from the exploitation of our beliefs, emotions and biases, not just from ignorance of statistics and mathematical methods of deception.
When Pfizer’s trials pre-rollout wound up with more deaths among the vaccinated than the placebo group, discovered by FOIA, everything Pfizer said was fiction.
It’s all such nonsense. ALL COVID viruses in the world today are Military Grade Bioweapons. There is NO real vaccine for these bioweapons, only Military Grade Vaccine Bioweapons. What the hell is wrong with everyone?
Most people think it means your risk of getting or dying from Wuhan Virus is 95% lower if you take it. That's false. It's a ratio of risks. Example: say 100 people out of a million unvaxxed people get hospitalized from the virus, but only 5 out of a million vaxxed people get hospitalized. They claim "95% effective" but actually you're pretty damn unlikely to get hospitalized either way.
It also fails to account for the fact that the vaxx itself is very dangerous and utterly ineffective at impeding transmission.
I read Peter Doshis' comment at the time and sent it to everyone I could think of. No one responded. Everyone in my husband's family took the shots. My husband did not. My side of the family is less trusting of government and therefore we're more wary. Only one sibling out of the other four took it.
Doshi's critique in the Fall of 2020 was the nail in the trial coffin for me. From that point on I had no hesitation advising ALL my patients of whatever group against taking the soon to be mandated shots. The transparently fraudulent trials themselves were sufficient to convince me of the malfeasance on display. No peer review, no data just press releases, no explanation for 3000+ suspected cases "unconfirmed" or lost to follow up. The icing on the cake was prematurely unblinding and crossing over because of the "ethical" obligation to offer the "vaccine" to the control group. The last maneuver is the oldest and most transparent trick in the trial book. It makes me furious to recall the episode.
It was never 95%. Not even close.
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/discrepancies-modernas-fda-report-demand-answers/
James, I am trying to correct the record of what we knew when and what BS was widely presented when. Doshi's piece does that.
Remember this well. He was the only one who had the courage to call this out.
He’s very respectable. He felt like a friend when everyone else in power/“science” seemed crazy.
I like Peter Doshi. He asks the right questions. I have printed some of his BMJ articles.
There is no proof that even one life has been saved by any Covid vaccine.
How would you suggest that proof be ascertained?
It can't be. That's the point. And no one has ever developed a Coronavirus vaccine.
How To Lie With Statistics (by Darryl Huff) received a Bill Gates’ thumbs up, and was a book he highly recommended.
I wonder why. And is it required reading for all employees with the Gates Foundation, GAVI, and all his other tax shelters .
Covid infection (projection) models and vaccine efficacy appears to be suffering from a serious data problem - caused by heavy leaning, on the wrong side , of the numbers scale .
I think I first heard about Darryl Huff's book being recommended by David Friedman (the physicist, economics professor and law professor) around 2012.
Maybe it is a false memory of mine.
The suprebrains know about cheating with numbers and they also get bamboozled. The bamboozle comes from the exploitation of our beliefs, emotions and biases, not just from ignorance of statistics and mathematical methods of deception.
Died in motor vehicle accident WITH covid (YES - include),
versus “ died FROM Covid. “ (Also and more honest data of Yes - include) .
That’s how they count. It’s ALL a YES to them - the MORE the merrier - add them up.
When Pfizer’s trials pre-rollout wound up with more deaths among the vaccinated than the placebo group, discovered by FOIA, everything Pfizer said was fiction.
many of us chose to remain in the control group
It’s all such nonsense. ALL COVID viruses in the world today are Military Grade Bioweapons. There is NO real vaccine for these bioweapons, only Military Grade Vaccine Bioweapons. What the hell is wrong with everyone?
Read this post by Dr. Malcolm Kendrick (GP, nursing home) from those November days.
https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2020/11/10/ninety-per-cent/
Please stop referring to the GMO jabs as vaccines unless you’re in support of Big Pharma.
Please watch this:
https://twitter.com/SpartaJustice/status/1631549284402200576?s=20
See https://brownstone.org/articles/vaccine-95-percent-effective-how/ for an explanation of why 95% is bullshit.
Most people think it means your risk of getting or dying from Wuhan Virus is 95% lower if you take it. That's false. It's a ratio of risks. Example: say 100 people out of a million unvaxxed people get hospitalized from the virus, but only 5 out of a million vaxxed people get hospitalized. They claim "95% effective" but actually you're pretty damn unlikely to get hospitalized either way.
It also fails to account for the fact that the vaxx itself is very dangerous and utterly ineffective at impeding transmission.
I read Peter Doshis' comment at the time and sent it to everyone I could think of. No one responded. Everyone in my husband's family took the shots. My husband did not. My side of the family is less trusting of government and therefore we're more wary. Only one sibling out of the other four took it.
Well said!