Negative effectiveness. In other words, the Death Injections are maiming and killing people. And this is the slow kill program that will accelerate over time. Look for a far more troubling term than “negative effectiveness” in the near future, upcoming false flags and other distractions notwithstanding.
Dec 23, 2021Liked by 2nd Smartest Guy in the World
Imagine going to the butcher and he still has some turkey from last Christmas. The jabs are now like last year's turkeys ! They have expired and are now poisonous
I just got messages from Organic Consumers Association and National Vaccine Information Center. Paypal refuses to take donations for them anymore. I suppose the Kennedy organisation is next. They try to oust the non conforming organisations.
I can assert that I'm the 2nd most Statistically Challenged Person in the World*, but I desperately want to understand this. My brain feels like it's been exposed to sandblasting on a windy day on the beach. One day I'm going to summons up the courage to try and understand what all those extra numbers in the brackets mean. For now I'm seeing 55.2% after primary (first two?), then a figure of 75.5% after booster. But the first seems to be a comparison to Delta (so is that 55% efficacy of the efficacy it was against Delta? Is this where the negative efficacy comes in?) and then the 2nd segues to a comparison with the unvaccinated (how do these comparisons work?! Why now suddenly compare to unvaccinated?). Then it seems to be saying it's a good thing to boost. I know that I'm seeing it exactly as the average dumb person is probably meant to be seeing it, so if you ever have the strength to give the statistically naive a crash course in this, I'll be keen to read a post on that!
*I allow for the possibility that 2nd may be too hopeful...
Imagine going to the butcher and he still has some turkey from last Christmas. The jabs are now like last year's turkeys ! They have expired and are now poisonous
I just got messages from Organic Consumers Association and National Vaccine Information Center. Paypal refuses to take donations for them anymore. I suppose the Kennedy organisation is next. They try to oust the non conforming organisations.
I can assert that I'm the 2nd most Statistically Challenged Person in the World*, but I desperately want to understand this. My brain feels like it's been exposed to sandblasting on a windy day on the beach. One day I'm going to summons up the courage to try and understand what all those extra numbers in the brackets mean. For now I'm seeing 55.2% after primary (first two?), then a figure of 75.5% after booster. But the first seems to be a comparison to Delta (so is that 55% efficacy of the efficacy it was against Delta? Is this where the negative efficacy comes in?) and then the 2nd segues to a comparison with the unvaccinated (how do these comparisons work?! Why now suddenly compare to unvaccinated?). Then it seems to be saying it's a good thing to boost. I know that I'm seeing it exactly as the average dumb person is probably meant to be seeing it, so if you ever have the strength to give the statistically naive a crash course in this, I'll be keen to read a post on that!
*I allow for the possibility that 2nd may be too hopeful...