Best Blackhat Forum

This post is like watching monkeys throw feces' at each other.

(07-25-2022 08:49 AM)Vivekananda Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-25-2022 12:29 AM)mthomas Wrote: [ -> ]More uh oh's......

uh oh, indeed....

Misleading. The graph showing England’s COVID-19 death statistics misrepresents the impact of vaccines to make it appear that COVID-19 vaccines heighten chances of dying with the disease.

"Graph showing England’s COVID-19 death statistics misrepresents impact of vaccines"
Social media users are sharing a graph which shows the number of COVID-19 deaths by vaccination status in England between April 1 and May 31. It reveals that 94% of deaths in that period were among those who are vaccinated. However, this statistic on its own is misleading as it fails to acknowledge the nation’s vaccination rate. The graph also originates from a blog that has previously been found by Reuters Fact Check to have shared health misinformation.
One Facebook user, whose post has been interacted with dozens of times, uploaded a screenshot of the graph along with the caption: “Whilst in the UK the population were distracted by Boris resigning, the UK Gov. quietly published a report confirming that the vaccinated population as a whole accounted for 94% of all Covid-19 deaths in April and May 2022.”
Similar posts can be seen on Facebook and Twitter.
The graph appears on a website that has been subject to several Reuters fact-checks. The blog’s authors misrepresent data to undermine the impact of COVID-19 vaccines. Reuters has published numerous fact-checks on this technique.
Data used in the graph comes from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). It reveals that, during April and May of this year, 4,647 vaccinated people died with COVID-19, compared to 288 unvaccinated people – or roughly 94% and 6% respectively.
However, as previously reported by Reuters Fact Check, it is misleading to claim these figures show vaccinated individuals are more likely to die with COVID-19 than the unvaccinated.
A spokesperson for the Office for National Statistics told Reuters via email: “Looking at the proportion of deaths among the fully vaccinated without accounting for the vaccination rate is highly misleading. For instance, if everyone were vaccinated, 100% of people would die vaccinated.”
Echoing this, Professor of Biostatistics Elizabeth Williamson told Reuters via email that the “graph in no way indicated a negative vaccine effectiveness”.
She explained: “In a world where most people are vaccinated… we would expect to see the proportion of vaccinated people who die from COVID-19 to be lower than the proportion of unvaccinated people who die from COVID-19. At the same time, we would expect the number of vaccinated people dying from COVID-19 to be higher than unvaccinated, simply because there are so many more vaccinated people... In addition, those at the highest risk are also the most likely to be vaccinated, exacerbating this phenomenon.”
The UKHSA also previously told Reuters that, given vaccine uptake levels in England are very high, it is expected that a large proportion of cases and deaths would occur in vaccinated individuals, even with a highly effective vaccine, because a larger proportion of the population are vaccinated than unvaccinated.
Dr Shamaila Anwar, science communicator at Team Halo, previously told Reuters: “It is important to understand the whole context to avoid misunderstanding data.”
She acknowledged the importance of accounting for the demographics of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, especially as Britain’s inoculation programme has prioritised those who are older or clinically vulnerable.
Dr Muge Cevik, a clinical lecturer in infectious diseases and medical virology at the University of St Andrews, also previously told Reuters that when the majority of people have been vaccinated, “most infections and deaths are expected to be among those vaccinated”.
According to National Health Service (NHS) data, nearly 45 million people had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine by May 31, 2022.
https://www.reuters.com/article/factchec...SL1N2Z10I3

Interesting take.....
Yet when the numbers are reversed as in HUGELY LOWERED DEATH RATES in largely UNVACCINATED India and the African Continent you cry about the validity of the data reporting.

So only use data that sides with your viewpoint and throw out all data that shows a different picture and/or theory???

Great way of following the science....NOT!

(07-25-2022 02:22 PM)bearflambe Wrote: [ -> ]This post is like watching monkeys throw feces' at each other.

Then why are you reading it?
Beware or you might get monkey pox!

"I don't care if you take the shot and 100 boosters"
- only 4 shots (at this moment).

(07-25-2022 08:39 PM)mthomas Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting take.....
Yet when the numbers are reversed as in HUGELY LOWERED DEATH RATES in largely UNVACCINATED India and the African Continent you cry about the validity of the data reporting.
So only use data that sides with your viewpoint and throw out all data that shows a different picture and/or theory???
Great way of following the science....NOT!

"So only use data that sides with your viewpoint and throw out all data that shows a different picture and/or theory??? Great way of following the science....NOT!"
It's exactly what you're doing here
Think about two hypothetical places in the world.
Place 1: zero vaccines.
Place 2: everybody vaccinated.
Number of deaths from 7th Feb to 6th March:
P1: 100 P2: 1000
"Oh ghosh, vaccines are killing! See the numbers!!!! There is much more people dying in P2!!!!"
Reality call: Population of P1: ten thousand. Population of P2: 10 million.
Just hypothetical data, but enough to show how numbers can be distorted to be misleading.

(07-26-2022 02:46 AM)Vivekananda Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-25-2022 08:39 PM)mthomas Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting take.....
Yet when the numbers are reversed as in HUGELY LOWERED DEATH RATES in largely UNVACCINATED India and the African Continent you cry about the validity of the data reporting.
So only use data that sides with your viewpoint and throw out all data that shows a different picture and/or theory???
Great way of following the science....NOT!

"So only use data that sides with your viewpoint and throw out all data that shows a different picture and/or theory??? Great way of following the science....NOT!"
It's exactly what you're doing here
Think about two hypothetical places in the world.
Place 1: zero vaccines.
Place 2: everybody vaccinated.
Number of deaths from 7th Feb to 6th March:
P1: 100 P2: 1000
"Oh ghosh, vaccines are killing! See the numbers!!!! There is much more people dying in P2!!!!"
Reality call: Population of P1: ten thousand. Population of P2: 10 million.
Just hypothetical data, but enough to show how numbers can be distorted to be misleading.

No Vivekananda, it is YOU that doesn't understand the scientific method of research.
You eat up the "official" Government/CDC/FDA and the politicians/scientists/doctor's and obey as if they are infallible in what they say/do/advise and proclaim as "established" science, when much of what they have said/done/advised and proclaimed has turned out to be misinformation/misleading/unscientific/untested and outright lies.

If you go back through the newscasts from 2020 and listen to the politicians, Dr. Death Fauci, scientists, doctor's, etc., you will find out that what they told you two year's ago is NOTHING like what they are telling you now.

True, we have learned a lot since the first outbreak based on data we have gathered but that still doesn't absolve all those that lied to us saying it was established science (IT WAS NOT AND STILL ISN"T!!!!). And they are also refusing to do the scientific research of why HUGE area's of the globe (Africa, India, etc.) have NOT had high Covid death rates as compared to area's that have been highly "vaccinated"....hmmmmm, maybe because using your example once the whole world was supposed to get the "vaccine" then the data would no longer have a base model to compare the "vaxxed" data too?????? Talk about distorting data to be misleading???????

You have been lied to multiple times by those in power that should have known better and then they forced people to get the "vaccines" against their will (by threatening to have them fired, or kept out of public places, etc.) and now we are learning that the "vaccines" aren't really vaccines, they don't protect you from getting the virus and don't protect you from dying from the virus.....and you still CHOOSE to believe what these KNOWN LIARS tell you?

Really?

I guess when there are people willing to believe what you say no matter how untrue, unscientific, propaganda based, greed based or just plain BS then I guess unscrupulous leaders WILL take advantage of you and keep doing it since the masses and media are too stupid (corrupt) to question the lying authorities.

Sad day when the people are asking to get fu#cked over and then say, "Thank you man, can I have another (booster)"....like pigs to the slaughter, lemmings over the cliff or useful idiots to the gulags....."1984" has come true, and we are starting to live it....

In the past two years, Covid-19 has killed more than three times as many children aged 6 months to 3 years as all deaths caused by 14 vaccine-preventable diseases combined over the past decade. The conclusion is from an analysis carried out by researchers Patricia Boccolini and Cristiano Boccolini, from the Childhood Health Observatory - Observa Infância (Fiocruz/Unifase).
Data were collected from the Brazilian List of Avoidable Deaths for children under 5 years old, in the Mortality Information System (SIM). Formulated by specialists from different areas related to child health and coordinated by the Ministry of Health, the list includes 14 diseases with a fatal outcome preventable by immunization.


https://saude.ig.com.br/2022-07-25/covid...encas.html

Okay, here is the trouble with numbers em India - AGAIN:

"COVID mortality in India: National survey data and health facility deaths"
Abstract
India’s national COVID death totals remain undetermined.
Using an independent nationally representative survey (...)
The analyses find that India’s cumulative COVID deaths by September 2021 were six to seven times higher than reported officially."
Here is the complete text: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scie...ookieSet=1

Quote:So no transparency from the FDA or Pfizer on a new experimental drug given to approx. half the world population and you have no problem with that? Didn't have to give info for 55 to 75 years, yeah, that makes perfect sense....(yes, sarcasm again)

Again: 55 years? 75 years? Really? You don't read my link about this, so here it is:

Truth: FDA Did NOT Ask For 75 Years To Release Pfizer Vaccine Data!
This is really just some “creative hyperbole” by Aaron Siri, the lawyer working on this FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request.
And here are the reasons why…
Fact #1 : FDA Did Not Ask For 75 Years To Release Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Data
First, let me be clear – the US FDA did not ask US District Judge Mark Pittman for 75 years to release the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine data.
That is merely the “interpretation” of Aaron Siri, the lawyer working for PHMPT (Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency) – the group requesting the data that the FDA used to licence the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.
As you will see below, it’s based on ignoring facts and basic math…
Fact #2 : FDA Has To Redact Files Before They Are Released
It is not simply a matter of handing over the documents to PHMPT.
The FDA has to go through every document and redact information that are exempt from disclosure under FOIA, before it can release them.
That process is not only time-consuming, it is resource-intensive because it requires government information specialists to review each page line-by-line.
The FDA estimates that it takes 8 minutes per page to read and review records for FOIA production.
Fact #3 : FDA Has 400 Other Pending FOIA Requests
The FOIA request by PHMPT is being handled by the Access Litigation and Freedom of Information Branch at the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER).
This is a small department with just ten employees, including the director and two trainees. So they really have just seven people who are trained well enough to process FOIA requests.
This small team is currently processing “approximately 400 currently pending FOIA requests“, while being embroiled in “6 active FOIA litigation matters“.
Needless to say, the heavy workload greatly limits how many pages this office can go through and redact every month.
Fact #4 : PHMPT Demanded “Everything” In 108 Days
The FDA asked PHMPT to narrow their request by specifying records they don’t require, so they can focus on processing the important documents they need.
The PHMPT, however, insisted that the FDA process and deliver ALL documents related to the approval of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine – some 329,000 pages!
On top of that, the PHMPT demanded that the FDA accomplish that within 108 days. That would require a processing rate of over 80,000 pages per month – far in excess of what the FDA FOIA office is capable of handling.
Fact #5 : FDA Vaccine Approval Is Different From FOIA Process
It seems obvious, but it has to be said – the FDA vaccine approval process is different from the FOIA process.
So it is ridiculous for the PHMPT to insist that their 108-day demand is valid because it “is the same amount of time” it took the FDA to review the documents and licence the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.
The vaccine approval process involves FDA scientists evaluating the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine for the EUA (Emergency Use Authorisation) or full FDA approval.
The FOIA process, on the other hand, involves FDA information specialists going through each page line-by-line to identify and redact proprietary information.
Fact #6 : FDA Vaccine Approval Process Adds A Ton Of New Documents
The FDA vaccine approval team went through fewer documents, because they only need to look at relevant information provided by Pfizer and BioNTech.
The FDA team in charge of this FOIA request would necessarily have to go through far more documents, because the approval process itself adds a ton of new documentation.
Even the PHMPT acknowledged that, specifically asking for “all correspondence and written summaries of oral discussions” related to the FDA approval of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.
Hence, it is ludicrous for the PHMPT to claim that the two processes are similar in effort and time.
Fact #7 : FDA Processes FOIA Requests In 500-Page Blocks
The FDA processes FOIA requests in 500-page blocks, which allow them to provide documents to more requesters, and avoid a few large requests monopolising their “finite processing resources”.
This is not a special processing limitation on the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine data, but a standard FDA processing rate that the courts have upheld for a long time.
Fact #8 : FDA Processing FOIA Requests Faster Than Proposed
The FDA was able to process some records faster than the 500-page rate, as they noted in their 6 December 2021 brief. They also said that they can release more than 12,000 pages by end of January 2022.
As it stands, the FDA appears to be doing above and beyond what it pledged to do, delivering almost 5000 pages per month – about 10X its promised rate.
Even if they end up delivering half that performance, they would finish processing 329,000 pages in 137 months – just under 11.5 years.
Obviously, 11.5 years is far less than the 55 years claimed…
Fact #9 : It Would Take PHMPT Months To Read Everything
PHMPT stated that they are a group of over 30 people. Let’s say there are 35 strong, and they take the same 8 minutes to read through each page.
Even if they all sat down and read for 8 hours a day, it would take them over 7 months just to read through the 329,000 pages ONCE.
And it should be noted that this involves 5X more people than the FDA FOIA team, and they are all dedicated to this singular task of reading those Pfizer documents.
Fact #10 : PHMPT Took Almost 108 Days To Read 5 Documents!
PHMPT took almost 108 days to read through the first batch of five documents that the FDA released to them on 17 November 2021.
It was only in early March 2022 when they found the 9 pages listing some 1,291 adverse events of special interest.
This not only proves that the FDA was right about how much time it takes to read these documents, it also shows that the PHMPT does not really need all 329,000 documents within 108 days.
It took the PHMPT almost that long just to read 5 documents! At this rate, it will take them some 16,450 years to read all 329,000 Pfizer documents…
Fact #11 : FDA Released Almost All Of PHMPT Priority List By Jan 2022
PHMPT appears to be cognisant that it is stupid to request for “everything” when most of the pages may not be relevant at all.
That’s why they sent the FDA a priority list of eight (8) items. And guess what – the US FDA was able to provide seven (7) of those items by January 31, 2022!
So Aaron Siri’s public griping about the FDA taking so long appears to be nothing more than theatre.
Fact #12 : Processing Time Depends On PHMPT, Not FDA
Aaron Siri claimed that the FDA disclosed in their 6 December 2021 brief that there are many more pages to process, thereby increasing the time to fully-release everything from 55 years to 75 years.

In addition to the original 329,000+ pages, the FDA discloses there is another “approximately 39,000 pages,” an additional “tens of thousands of additional pages,” and an additional 126 data files, many of which have over ten thousand rows for which the FDA intends to treat twenty rows as one page. Assuming an average of only ten thousand rows per data file, and that its amorphous “tens of thousands of additional pages” amounts to 20,000 pages, the grand total is at least 451,000 pages.

That’s nonsense, because the processing time ultimately depends on what the PHMPT is demanding.
As the FDA noted, their initial assessment of 329,000 pages was based on their interpretation of PHMPT’s request for all information from the original Pfizer vaccine BLA (biologics licence application).
But if the PHMPT insist that they want OTHER RECORDS like BLA supplements, amendments and product correspondence, then the FDA would have to process an additional 39,000 pages.
And if the PHMPT insist that they also want the “investigational new drug applications” (whatever for?), then that’s tens of thousands of additional pages.
So the ball is really in the PHMPT’s court. They can drag this out to 100 years and more. All they have to do is insist that they want the FDA to process even more (irrelevant) pages.
https://www.techarp.com/science/fda-75-y...cine-data/

Quote: "40% increase in NON Covid related deaths compared to pre-pandemic rates"

Fact:
"The inference that a 40 percent increase in the death rate of Americans 18 to 64 is caused by vaccines is baseless"
https://www.newswise.com/factcheck/the-i...s-baseless
and additionaly: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid...deaths.htm
“We deserve answers, and some would conjecture, ‘Hey, does this have something to do with the fact that we might have done a mass inoculation strategy?’” Kirk asked Fox News host Tucker Carlson. Carlson, who’s made similar claims in the past, didn’t push back at all on his guest’s suggestion. On the show, we can hear Kirk saying "We have a 40 percent increase in death, it's not because of COVID." However, Davison did NOT say it wasn't COVID related. In fact, Davison said the data shows COVID deaths are greatly understated among working-age Americans.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) explains that excess deaths are associated with COVID-19 directly or indirectly. The rise in fatalities is largely associated with COVID-19, either directly from the disease or from other causes occurring in the context of health care shortages or overburdened health care systems.