To zero in on this point, this is a statement that many have questioned based on the data, how it was collected, and how it was presented. What sources are you using to make this claim? Perhaps this is a good starting point for discussion.
Data that differentiates between age groups is better. Data is better if it specifies whether single shot or double shot (but prior to 14 days after) is counted as vaccinated or unvaccinated. The listing of comorbidities in a probabilistic model is great value too. The cost analysis of lock-down measures vs no lock-down measures as it pertains to lowered life expectancy from future economic hardship would be great too.
For the sake of crossing notes, here's a link that summarizes many observations that fuel consideration for abstaining: https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/30-facts-you-need-know-covid-cribsheet
If there are good counter-points to these observations, it would have great value in the conversation
Data that differentiates between age groups is better. Data is better if it specifies whether single shot or double shot (but prior to 14 days after) is counted as vaccinated or unvaccinated. The listing of comorbidities in a probabilistic model is great value too. The cost analysis of lock-down measures vs no lock-down measures as it pertains to lowered life expectancy from future economic hardship would be great too.
For the sake of crossing notes, here's a link that summarizes many observations that fuel consideration for abstaining: https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/30-facts-you-need-know-covid-cribsheet
If there are good counter-points to these observations, it would have great value in the conversation
You have around 250 000 deads in the states. Even when 50 % would be fake, it is far more then people died because of the vaccine.
Btw, i cant believe that your peoples in the hospitals are full of liars.