VERY wide confidence bands, so you can see when this is the case, and statisticians and other scientists know that super wide confidence intervals mean you have very little information. This was also high exposure cohort and likely means you would need a booster dose after time passes. Come on igor, stop playing dumb
VERY wide confidence bands, so you can see when this is the case, and statisticians and other scientists know that super wide confidence intervals mean you have very little information. This was also high exposure cohort and likely means you would need a booster dose after time passes. Come on igor, stop playing dumb
And yet, the entire 95% confidence interval falls below 0%, so less than a 1:20 chance statistically that your suppositions are correct.
The thing is, when you have your attitude, what one should do is rerun the trial to expand the study size to shrink those CIs and get a truer picture. You'd think someone with pockets like Gates could easily bankroll such a study, yet he'd much rather just say fuck it, and hope (?) the children don't die of worse outcomes down the line. I say (?) as he is famous for claiming that vaccines will reduce the population of Africa. His statement can be read of one two ways; I used to give him a generous benefit of the doubt, but those confidence intervals aren't looking so hot after the last few years...
...and that's why they'd really need a TRACKER implant per vaxinee, rather than mere biometrics: you have to vax them and keep doing it, at marginal efficiency, and every round of boosters you'd lose track (pun intended) of 1% since the meningitis would fry their brain and/or kill them. So, trackers it is!
First GAVI "online expertise prophet" (tm) I've seen on substack, congrats! You're not going to have a very good time flogging your herd of dead donkeys around here my friend..
VERY wide confidence bands, so you can see when this is the case, and statisticians and other scientists know that super wide confidence intervals mean you have very little information. This was also high exposure cohort and likely means you would need a booster dose after time passes. Come on igor, stop playing dumb
And yet, the entire 95% confidence interval falls below 0%, so less than a 1:20 chance statistically that your suppositions are correct.
The thing is, when you have your attitude, what one should do is rerun the trial to expand the study size to shrink those CIs and get a truer picture. You'd think someone with pockets like Gates could easily bankroll such a study, yet he'd much rather just say fuck it, and hope (?) the children don't die of worse outcomes down the line. I say (?) as he is famous for claiming that vaccines will reduce the population of Africa. His statement can be read of one two ways; I used to give him a generous benefit of the doubt, but those confidence intervals aren't looking so hot after the last few years...
...and that's why they'd really need a TRACKER implant per vaxinee, rather than mere biometrics: you have to vax them and keep doing it, at marginal efficiency, and every round of boosters you'd lose track (pun intended) of 1% since the meningitis would fry their brain and/or kill them. So, trackers it is!
that's why you run RCT's which were done and give a booster dose once efficacy wanes (18 months)
First GAVI "online expertise prophet" (tm) I've seen on substack, congrats! You're not going to have a very good time flogging your herd of dead donkeys around here my friend..
Yes precisely so after 10 years you arrived at a calculated 100% meningitis rate! Fantastic. Is the "92% effective" modRNA meningitis vax ready yet?
(It's your employer's vax plan that sounds really dumb or perhaps even plain evil, all a question of interpretation. The bluescreen of vaxx so to say)
evidence free ranting