I teach this at the college level. I believe the analysis is impeccable. The statements are intellectually modest, but to me the conclusion is clear.
It is true that correlation does not necessarily imply causation, but there must be an explanation for the observed association. Either X causes Y to change, or Y causes X to change, or a co…
I teach this at the college level. I believe the analysis is impeccable. The statements are intellectually modest, but to me the conclusion is clear.
It is true that correlation does not necessarily imply causation, but there must be an explanation for the observed association. Either X causes Y to change, or Y causes X to change, or a confounding variable Z causes both X and Y to change - or else there is a p-value probability that there is no correlation at all. Your F values are substantial.
So what gives? Does the death of individuals render them retroactively vaccinated when previously they were not? That is impossible. The causation could only go in one direction, unless there is a confounding variable. I say the burden is on the authorities claiming the injections are safe to prove it is so.
I would appreciate a link to the original data, or at least enter it as text into the article or a comment. It is too much trouble for me to read all the numbers off of the image file above. Thank you.
Thanks! I will be glad to email you the cut and pasted data. Check my proven relationship article on how to download that data. let me know, I pinned your reply and thanks for the compliment.
If it quacks like a duck... walks like a duck .... and tastes like a duck if you eat it...
It's a duck.
I know multiple very healthy people - including a semi pro hockey player --- who had severe damage the day of their injection - or within a short period afterwards.
The most recent one is the head coach of an ice hockey team near us - he's maybe 40... fit healthy -- had a heart attack after his booster a couple of weeks ago - emergency pace maker surgery - and now is on the list for a heart transplant.
The semi pro hockey player had a severe reaction after jab 1 -- is still nowhere near recovered a year onwards... he works at most a dozen hours per week -- and is exhausted from just that.
My ex neighbour had heart damage after her first two jabs -- told it was 'genetic'... following her booster she felt numbness in one hand the next day --- that has spread throughout her body -- I received a call last week - she's been informed she has a severe neurological problem -- that will kill her. The doctor of course told her it's nothing to do with the jab -- just a coincidence that the problem started the day after.
This is only going to get worse. Trust me. It will be the biggest cause to shining the light on the truth. Then again so many pilots flying are keeping quiet because they are afraid of losing their jobs, either from speaking out on this subject and or getting examined and proving their hearts have been damaged. At least 30% is estimated. Check this out. The new WOKE culture has started to infiltrate the FAA with regard to this nominee. https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/bidens-choice-faa-administrator-withdraws-nomination-after-lack-senate-support . Plus, with its new policies for hiring commercial airline pilots. They want 50% of all new airline pilots be people of color and women. They really are no longer paying attention to experience. Its all discussed in this latest interview with Josh Yoder. https://rumble.com/v2hslu4-medical-tyranny-in-the-skies-josh-yoder-freedom-alive-ep78.html?fbclid=IwAR1pYs24nKH2SklxeG3m6dUTgqsnNbG7Oxh5NgzQU7Cs-JXDHltq_dlEeeo. No amount of the best training can replace experience. Thats just factual. Many other airlines over seas have serious safety issues associated with this practice. Japan Airlines being just one of them.
The problem with confounding variable Z is that first you need to find and identify Z. As far as I know, no one has proposed anything reasonable. If I was associated with the mRNA vaccine development and truly believed it was not the cause of the excess mortality, I would be frantically searching for variable Z, if for no other reason than to cover my ass when the recriminations start.
Seriously Igor, people's stress levels have gotten so high during this plandemic, that it could very well be a factor, especially in cardiovascular deaths. It might not be variable Z, but it certainly could be a contributing factor.
It doesn’t explain the advanced cancers, or even perfectly healthy young people dropping dead. Stress is a known factor, but not in the deaths of young people who have heart attacks. Thing WWII: how many stress heart attacks happened on the battlefield?
"no one has proposed anything reasonable" Lemme try.
HYPOTHESIS 1
Countries which had higher vaccination rates were a result of more intense propaganda and/or more compliant populations which therefore heeded authority's urge to get vaccinated, but also they
(a) heeded the advice avoid hospitals, which meant missed checkups and screenings, eg for cancer
(b) followed advice to mask, which may have caused toxic nano-particle inhalation, pathogen build ups, etc
(c) responded with increased fear levels because of the fear-based propaganda and/or increased stress levels caused by upheaval of work/school routines, causing pathological changes in peoples' bodies, perhaps even epigenetic responses
HYPOTHESIS 2
Medical treatment OF covid and associated protocols, eg Remdesivir, Paxlovid have had a higher uptake in more highly vaccinated countries. Those have high mortality as a side-effect.
HYPOTHESIS 3
There was another technology rolled out over the last 3 years at a greater rate in the wealthier (more vaccinated) countries than others.
- 5G?
- Atmospheric aerosol injection to combat "climate change"?
- Nano-tech increasingly embedded in consumer products causing absorptions through skin, lungs and digestion?
All plausible in this crazy world. None of them discount the vaccines as causing deaths - just adding to the democide. If depopulation is the agenda of the supranational Corporatocracy that seems to run the world - then a further Hypothesis is they would use multiple methods - all relatively slow & surreptitious so as not to alarm the fast asleep - but several methods to cause the awake to argue among ourselves as to which is the one.
Humans like simple single causes. Complexity requires more abstract reasoning than many people have time and capacity for.
Not all vax dead . so there 're other reasons instead simple vax or plus vax .. another variable is how many infections of covid and of wich variant? is the combination the problem? between infection and booster? I'm writing from Italy, and from one of the epicentry of the disease .. Piacenza .. In 2022 in the provincia of Piacenza we have a rate of over 100% heartattack (870 vs 400 of medium, even if 2020, from january to september) so I read on local media and an interview to a local public healt manager. Hypothesis 3 is for all peple, not only vax.. maybe is it true only for vaxxed? We need an investigation without prejudices .. and with the expecting of multiple of causes .. Surely the fear that we had leaved had our heatl got worse ps sorry for my english
A recent study, which I cannot link to right now, shows that a higher percentage of flu patients than Covid patients show persistent symptoms 3 months following infection. The tantalizing conclusion is that long-Covid is equally or less prevalent than long-flu or numerous other long-infections.
As I'm sure you know, depending on the jab, there are certain windows in which you're considered "jabbed." i.e. Pfizer and Moderna "fully jabbed" windows are 15-89 days post-jab.
If a jabbie dies 0-14 days or 90+ days post-jab, they will be considered "unjabbed," AND ironically be counted as a "virus" death. LOL
Anyway, the more jabs these people get, the more their risk for an adverse event goes up.
More likely it's combinations of QA issues in production, transportation and storage. Remember that the original message about the mRNA "vaccines" were that they needed cryptogenic storage and had a very short use by date. The "hot" lots may simply be those that were better produced, transported and stored because a greater portion of the mRNA lipid capsules survived and transfected more cells for the same dose.
Another issue which needs a lot more publicity, is that it's literally 50/50 if you get the correct, full-length protein instructions. When the FDA tried looking they found only 50% were as intended, the other 50% were mangled, misfolded, too long or too short. And no, we have no real idea of the effect of those, other than the high risk of prion disease.
So did they reject and ban immediately?
No, they changed the criteria down to 50%.
That's the "protection" you're getting from government agencies. "50 50? Welp, good enough, fuk em!"
Maria Gutschi is a pharmacist with more than 30 years experience in hospital, community and government. She is an experienced hospital manager and has initiated and managed award winning programs in antimicrobial stewardship and model standards for pharmacy compounding of hazardous (ie chemo) and non-hazardous sterile preparations for patient care.
Someone mentioned that in the course of production, in large stainless vats, where the concoction is mixed together before bottling, that the ingredients are prone to settling, wherein a higher concentration might occur in the vials which were filled from lowest levels. That's criminal negligence on the part of the company, if it is so.
You're making this way too hard. Death numbers are very stable. Only in periods of war or famine and disease, where the younger die, will the death numbers change. As an example (and as bad as the data was) the death numbers pre-vaccination during supposed c-19 did not change. Why? Because the ave age of death from c-19 was also the average age of death.
Post vaccination that has all changed. Excess deaths are remarkably higher, insurance companies report higher death claims, and for the young, and funeral companies are reporting higher revenues and earnings because they have far more business, which is an anomaly.
I can't stress enough how stable and accurate the science or business of actuary data compiling is. The flags raised in the last year form the above mentioned are alarming and only happen when some black swan like event occurs. This alone should be, by far, enough to establish a causation.
I know, I know! Only medically deceived people got vaccinated and those same people are more likely to have iatrogenic problems in the future. There’s your factor F!
Ok, I’m not serious, because clearly this does not explain the increase over time at all, nor the mechanism of mortality for these excess deaths. We’re staring the stark reality in the face and it’s really really scary.
Igor used the more common "Linear Regression" method to arrive at lines of closest fit; but if one uses the more accurate "Theil-Sen" method (which is not so influenced by outliers) I suspect the slopes will be even more significant.
What if a person notices that recently, each time he checks his wallet, that there's cash missing. He at some point derives a theory and puts it to test. He does NOT take the stance that it cannot be this person or that, (which frequent his place) simply because there is no proof to sustain that assumption. He makes plans to find out! Is that not logical and scientific? A surprise may or may not be forthcoming, but he sets out anyway. When proof comes, he is satisfied and does not reject truth on account of heartache.
This "plannedemic" has all the hallmarks of a scam. If anyone does not admit this, it is probably because of their unwillingness to face reality, which also, in turn, "excuses" them from taking due action.
Really to me the entire 'correlation' thing is a bit of a red herring. Everything in science MUST follow correlation, else we could never determine a darn thing.
For example, how can you conduct an experiment, if you're just go0ing to dismiss your own results with a sneering "Well correlation doesn't equal causation!"
Run the same experiment again and dismiss it again, loop that forever? Or accept there may be a link and conduct further experiments to confirm or disprove it?
To me, when someone starts squeaking about correlation I just hear "Stop looking at the facts!"
coorelation is what they used to claim there was efficacy but when it comes to deaths "correlation does not equal causation". This was in the pfizer study where there is matched groups i.e. same age distribution, income etc demographics. That is quite different to when you are looking at observational data where 'the vaccinated' are older or otherwise different from the 'unvaccinated'. That is to say that the better quality science in pfizers own study shows the deaths so there isn't any need to do any further experiment or look at observational data. There already is the placebo contolled study from pfizer. https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/more-people-died-in-the-key-clinical
There is Always correlation with root cause, therefore the finding of correlation can not be dismissed with hand waving. Igor, How about using that true statement from a position of strength vs offering their suggested weak apology statement?
Correlation may not automatically imply causation (though that is the basis for belief that vaccines eradicated many diseases, even though public health and nutrition improvements correlate more universally with the decline of historical infectious diseases), but other points of correlation provide stronger support for the injuries caused by vaccines. There are indeed many other concurrent variables that correlate with the effects of the jabs.
there is no correlation between 'vaccines' and 'eradicating many diseases'. Measles for example declined 90% before the injections. Smallpox was prolongued and made worse for 200 years with the injections and then relabelled measles, chickenpox etc. if anything there is an inverse correlation with more "diseases" being invented e.g covid and negative impacts on health. https://odysee.com/@CitizenScience:0/Kate-Sugak-The-truth-about-smallpox:1
I know full well public health improvements correlate more strongly with the decline of historical diseases, and have edited my comment accordingly. My point is that the decline of diseases after vaccination programs is all the vaccine apologists are hanging their hat on.
I do think the evidence indicates the measles vaccines helped bring down the incidence of measles (morbidity) to near 0 - but that it most likely caused far greater harm from chronic health issues than the exceptionally low death rate among those who got it at the time the vaccine was introduced. Which could be very near 0 with proper treatment, such as therapeutic doses of vitamins A, C, and D, zinc, quercetin, etc.
We also don't need to make exaggerations, which only provide ammo for the apologists. I cannot honestly refute the claim that measles vaccines brought about a sharp decline in the prevalence of measles. But one can certainly make a strong case they've done more harm than good, at least in terms of maintaining OPTIMUM health, for a disease that was killing people at a declining rate of 1 in 400,000 per year at the time the vaccine was introduced, after which all manner of chronic health issues have exploded.
What about a person's right to optimize their health? I'd rather take a 1 in a million chance of dying from a disease from which I have 999,997 in 1,000,000 odds of full recovery than a say, 1 in 100 chance of a noticeable disability, and 100% chance of some adverse health effect, even if sub-clinical.
I teach this at the college level. I believe the analysis is impeccable. The statements are intellectually modest, but to me the conclusion is clear.
It is true that correlation does not necessarily imply causation, but there must be an explanation for the observed association. Either X causes Y to change, or Y causes X to change, or a confounding variable Z causes both X and Y to change - or else there is a p-value probability that there is no correlation at all. Your F values are substantial.
So what gives? Does the death of individuals render them retroactively vaccinated when previously they were not? That is impossible. The causation could only go in one direction, unless there is a confounding variable. I say the burden is on the authorities claiming the injections are safe to prove it is so.
I would appreciate a link to the original data, or at least enter it as text into the article or a comment. It is too much trouble for me to read all the numbers off of the image file above. Thank you.
Thanks! I will be glad to email you the cut and pasted data. Check my proven relationship article on how to download that data. let me know, I pinned your reply and thanks for the compliment.
Igor, and everyone, I just want to make sure everyone here sees this, https://www.faa.gov/coronavirus/guidance_resources/vaccine_faq
If it quacks like a duck... walks like a duck .... and tastes like a duck if you eat it...
It's a duck.
I know multiple very healthy people - including a semi pro hockey player --- who had severe damage the day of their injection - or within a short period afterwards.
The most recent one is the head coach of an ice hockey team near us - he's maybe 40... fit healthy -- had a heart attack after his booster a couple of weeks ago - emergency pace maker surgery - and now is on the list for a heart transplant.
The semi pro hockey player had a severe reaction after jab 1 -- is still nowhere near recovered a year onwards... he works at most a dozen hours per week -- and is exhausted from just that.
My ex neighbour had heart damage after her first two jabs -- told it was 'genetic'... following her booster she felt numbness in one hand the next day --- that has spread throughout her body -- I received a call last week - she's been informed she has a severe neurological problem -- that will kill her. The doctor of course told her it's nothing to do with the jab -- just a coincidence that the problem started the day after.
I know others but this will suffice.
Quack Quack Quack
And for all of the shills hawking the jabs, just ask them a direct question and see if they try to dodge it. If it DUCKS like a QUACK....
Check this out. https://www.faa.gov/coronavirus/guidance_resources/vaccine_faq
This is only going to get worse. Trust me. It will be the biggest cause to shining the light on the truth. Then again so many pilots flying are keeping quiet because they are afraid of losing their jobs, either from speaking out on this subject and or getting examined and proving their hearts have been damaged. At least 30% is estimated. Check this out. The new WOKE culture has started to infiltrate the FAA with regard to this nominee. https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/bidens-choice-faa-administrator-withdraws-nomination-after-lack-senate-support . Plus, with its new policies for hiring commercial airline pilots. They want 50% of all new airline pilots be people of color and women. They really are no longer paying attention to experience. Its all discussed in this latest interview with Josh Yoder. https://rumble.com/v2hslu4-medical-tyranny-in-the-skies-josh-yoder-freedom-alive-ep78.html?fbclid=IwAR1pYs24nKH2SklxeG3m6dUTgqsnNbG7Oxh5NgzQU7Cs-JXDHltq_dlEeeo. No amount of the best training can replace experience. Thats just factual. Many other airlines over seas have serious safety issues associated with this practice. Japan Airlines being just one of them.
The problem with confounding variable Z is that first you need to find and identify Z. As far as I know, no one has proposed anything reasonable. If I was associated with the mRNA vaccine development and truly believed it was not the cause of the excess mortality, I would be frantically searching for variable Z, if for no other reason than to cover my ass when the recriminations start.
Climate change = Z
Right. That or systemic racism.
Actually the real factor is Republican disinformation about 2020 election.
It is so stressful that people are dying -- especially liberals -- so it is not the vaccine
Seriously Igor, people's stress levels have gotten so high during this plandemic, that it could very well be a factor, especially in cardiovascular deaths. It might not be variable Z, but it certainly could be a contributing factor.
It doesn’t explain the advanced cancers, or even perfectly healthy young people dropping dead. Stress is a known factor, but not in the deaths of young people who have heart attacks. Thing WWII: how many stress heart attacks happened on the battlefield?
"Republican disinformation"! Really?
Try MSM / Democrats in the mix. Billboards are up announcing the 'shots' are safe'. Give me a break.
Seriously now... We have been dumbed down as a nation and critical thinking hasn't been applied these past 2-3 years or more.
covid and 'vaccines' have become the peoples 'gods'! Authoritarianism
abounds' and hurting all of us.
What goes around comes around. When you really think about it, it is poetic. Always painful and sad to watch people slowly self destruct.
White supremacy, too. But that would auto-correlate.
Don't forget World War Trans. We're at War.
"no one has proposed anything reasonable" Lemme try.
HYPOTHESIS 1
Countries which had higher vaccination rates were a result of more intense propaganda and/or more compliant populations which therefore heeded authority's urge to get vaccinated, but also they
(a) heeded the advice avoid hospitals, which meant missed checkups and screenings, eg for cancer
(b) followed advice to mask, which may have caused toxic nano-particle inhalation, pathogen build ups, etc
(c) responded with increased fear levels because of the fear-based propaganda and/or increased stress levels caused by upheaval of work/school routines, causing pathological changes in peoples' bodies, perhaps even epigenetic responses
HYPOTHESIS 2
Medical treatment OF covid and associated protocols, eg Remdesivir, Paxlovid have had a higher uptake in more highly vaccinated countries. Those have high mortality as a side-effect.
HYPOTHESIS 3
There was another technology rolled out over the last 3 years at a greater rate in the wealthier (more vaccinated) countries than others.
- 5G?
- Atmospheric aerosol injection to combat "climate change"?
- Nano-tech increasingly embedded in consumer products causing absorptions through skin, lungs and digestion?
Either way, there needs to be an investigation!
All plausible in this crazy world. None of them discount the vaccines as causing deaths - just adding to the democide. If depopulation is the agenda of the supranational Corporatocracy that seems to run the world - then a further Hypothesis is they would use multiple methods - all relatively slow & surreptitious so as not to alarm the fast asleep - but several methods to cause the awake to argue among ourselves as to which is the one.
Humans like simple single causes. Complexity requires more abstract reasoning than many people have time and capacity for.
yes ... and their might be synergy between the different methods.
Implement quickly, before they become aware.
The vaccines may be enough.
Different vaccination schedules with each person's immune system reacting individually. 40% all cause mortality across all ages.
Now that is an alarm.
Not all vax dead . so there 're other reasons instead simple vax or plus vax .. another variable is how many infections of covid and of wich variant? is the combination the problem? between infection and booster? I'm writing from Italy, and from one of the epicentry of the disease .. Piacenza .. In 2022 in the provincia of Piacenza we have a rate of over 100% heartattack (870 vs 400 of medium, even if 2020, from january to september) so I read on local media and an interview to a local public healt manager. Hypothesis 3 is for all peple, not only vax.. maybe is it true only for vaxxed? We need an investigation without prejudices .. and with the expecting of multiple of causes .. Surely the fear that we had leaved had our heatl got worse ps sorry for my english
We see from the (first) graph on this page [https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/danish-lot-to-lot-variability-data] that there were probably 3 different types of injection, with 3 very different rates of mortality.
Not all vax dead... yet.
Long covid seems to be the most popular the Z variable right now
Yes thats the way the narrative is going, but perhaps Z = Long Covid can be disproven if one can show Long Covid is not affecting unvaxxed?
Oh good point
Part of the answer to that is https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35456309/
which shows that the recent increase in myocarditis and pericarditis is NOT associated with covid infection.
A recent study, which I cannot link to right now, shows that a higher percentage of flu patients than Covid patients show persistent symptoms 3 months following infection. The tantalizing conclusion is that long-Covid is equally or less prevalent than long-flu or numerous other long-infections.
Exactly. There is nothing under that shell
The only variable is the JAB.
As I'm sure you know, depending on the jab, there are certain windows in which you're considered "jabbed." i.e. Pfizer and Moderna "fully jabbed" windows are 15-89 days post-jab.
If a jabbie dies 0-14 days or 90+ days post-jab, they will be considered "unjabbed," AND ironically be counted as a "virus" death. LOL
Anyway, the more jabs these people get, the more their risk for an adverse event goes up.
Also, all jabs are not created equal. Some lots appear to be much more lethal
Correct. Different formulations, dosages, placebos, and simple human error.
More likely it's combinations of QA issues in production, transportation and storage. Remember that the original message about the mRNA "vaccines" were that they needed cryptogenic storage and had a very short use by date. The "hot" lots may simply be those that were better produced, transported and stored because a greater portion of the mRNA lipid capsules survived and transfected more cells for the same dose.
Here's Dr. Ryan Cole's take on the "I feel fine" people. They were LUCKY.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/NG49HuyZDMFv/
Another issue which needs a lot more publicity, is that it's literally 50/50 if you get the correct, full-length protein instructions. When the FDA tried looking they found only 50% were as intended, the other 50% were mangled, misfolded, too long or too short. And no, we have no real idea of the effect of those, other than the high risk of prion disease.
So did they reject and ban immediately?
No, they changed the criteria down to 50%.
That's the "protection" you're getting from government agencies. "50 50? Welp, good enough, fuk em!"
Some related videos to the manufacturing process & the incomplete proteins:
Sasha Latypova Interview - We The Patriots USA
September 15, 2022
https://rumble.com/v1jy8fz-vaccine-safety-awareness-marathon-2022-part-20-sasha-latypova.html
Maria Gutschi is a pharmacist with more than 30 years experience in hospital, community and government. She is an experienced hospital manager and has initiated and managed award winning programs in antimicrobial stewardship and model standards for pharmacy compounding of hazardous (ie chemo) and non-hazardous sterile preparations for patient care.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/muB0nrznCAC4/
Dr. Krueger many months ago:
http://enformtk.u-aizu.ac.jp/howard/gcep_dr_vanessa_schmidt_krueger/
Good observation, Hazel!
Someone mentioned that in the course of production, in large stainless vats, where the concoction is mixed together before bottling, that the ingredients are prone to settling, wherein a higher concentration might occur in the vials which were filled from lowest levels. That's criminal negligence on the part of the company, if it is so.
Ray
As a teacher, I would be interested to know what grade you would give this paper by Igor?
All his papers are A or else he himself retracts them
"I say the burden is on the authorities claiming the injections are safe to prove it is so."
You are correct if this is a clinical trial. But since these are 'experimental' vaccines, they should bear the burden.
You're making this way too hard. Death numbers are very stable. Only in periods of war or famine and disease, where the younger die, will the death numbers change. As an example (and as bad as the data was) the death numbers pre-vaccination during supposed c-19 did not change. Why? Because the ave age of death from c-19 was also the average age of death.
Post vaccination that has all changed. Excess deaths are remarkably higher, insurance companies report higher death claims, and for the young, and funeral companies are reporting higher revenues and earnings because they have far more business, which is an anomaly.
I can't stress enough how stable and accurate the science or business of actuary data compiling is. The flags raised in the last year form the above mentioned are alarming and only happen when some black swan like event occurs. This alone should be, by far, enough to establish a causation.
I know, I know! Only medically deceived people got vaccinated and those same people are more likely to have iatrogenic problems in the future. There’s your factor F!
Ok, I’m not serious, because clearly this does not explain the increase over time at all, nor the mechanism of mortality for these excess deaths. We’re staring the stark reality in the face and it’s really really scary.
Igor used the more common "Linear Regression" method to arrive at lines of closest fit; but if one uses the more accurate "Theil-Sen" method (which is not so influenced by outliers) I suspect the slopes will be even more significant.
Yes, Laine!
What if a person notices that recently, each time he checks his wallet, that there's cash missing. He at some point derives a theory and puts it to test. He does NOT take the stance that it cannot be this person or that, (which frequent his place) simply because there is no proof to sustain that assumption. He makes plans to find out! Is that not logical and scientific? A surprise may or may not be forthcoming, but he sets out anyway. When proof comes, he is satisfied and does not reject truth on account of heartache.
This "plannedemic" has all the hallmarks of a scam. If anyone does not admit this, it is probably because of their unwillingness to face reality, which also, in turn, "excuses" them from taking due action.
Just my thought, and THANKS for yours!
Ray
Really to me the entire 'correlation' thing is a bit of a red herring. Everything in science MUST follow correlation, else we could never determine a darn thing.
For example, how can you conduct an experiment, if you're just go0ing to dismiss your own results with a sneering "Well correlation doesn't equal causation!"
Run the same experiment again and dismiss it again, loop that forever? Or accept there may be a link and conduct further experiments to confirm or disprove it?
To me, when someone starts squeaking about correlation I just hear "Stop looking at the facts!"
coorelation is what they used to claim there was efficacy but when it comes to deaths "correlation does not equal causation". This was in the pfizer study where there is matched groups i.e. same age distribution, income etc demographics. That is quite different to when you are looking at observational data where 'the vaccinated' are older or otherwise different from the 'unvaccinated'. That is to say that the better quality science in pfizers own study shows the deaths so there isn't any need to do any further experiment or look at observational data. There already is the placebo contolled study from pfizer. https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/more-people-died-in-the-key-clinical
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradford_Hill_criteria
An equally valid statement would be the opposite of the official claims, for example. "The vaccines have NOT been shown to be safe nor effective."
There is Always correlation with root cause, therefore the finding of correlation can not be dismissed with hand waving. Igor, How about using that true statement from a position of strength vs offering their suggested weak apology statement?
Correlation may not automatically imply causation (though that is the basis for belief that vaccines eradicated many diseases, even though public health and nutrition improvements correlate more universally with the decline of historical infectious diseases), but other points of correlation provide stronger support for the injuries caused by vaccines. There are indeed many other concurrent variables that correlate with the effects of the jabs.
there is no correlation between 'vaccines' and 'eradicating many diseases'. Measles for example declined 90% before the injections. Smallpox was prolongued and made worse for 200 years with the injections and then relabelled measles, chickenpox etc. if anything there is an inverse correlation with more "diseases" being invented e.g covid and negative impacts on health. https://odysee.com/@CitizenScience:0/Kate-Sugak-The-truth-about-smallpox:1
I know full well public health improvements correlate more strongly with the decline of historical diseases, and have edited my comment accordingly. My point is that the decline of diseases after vaccination programs is all the vaccine apologists are hanging their hat on.
I do think the evidence indicates the measles vaccines helped bring down the incidence of measles (morbidity) to near 0 - but that it most likely caused far greater harm from chronic health issues than the exceptionally low death rate among those who got it at the time the vaccine was introduced. Which could be very near 0 with proper treatment, such as therapeutic doses of vitamins A, C, and D, zinc, quercetin, etc.
We also don't need to make exaggerations, which only provide ammo for the apologists. I cannot honestly refute the claim that measles vaccines brought about a sharp decline in the prevalence of measles. But one can certainly make a strong case they've done more harm than good, at least in terms of maintaining OPTIMUM health, for a disease that was killing people at a declining rate of 1 in 400,000 per year at the time the vaccine was introduced, after which all manner of chronic health issues have exploded.
What about a person's right to optimize their health? I'd rather take a 1 in a million chance of dying from a disease from which I have 999,997 in 1,000,000 odds of full recovery than a say, 1 in 100 chance of a noticeable disability, and 100% chance of some adverse health effect, even if sub-clinical.
The FAAjust admitted it. https://www.faa.gov/coronavirus/guidance_resources/vaccine_faq