Jump to content

85.7% of Covid Deaths in Canada Were Among the Multi-Vaxed from Aug to Sept of 2022. Jabbing 85% of the Population Didn't Reduce Deaths


Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

You're sick. You need help.

Of course it makes a difference to Canadians that SNC has a court-documented history of bribing elected officials. But for the 1% of Canadians who don't care, they should have at least been exposed to the information so that they could say "I don't care". 

Our media takes 5 minutes of airtime to do features things like a guy who puts up plexiglass between tellers and the customers they serve. They had plenty of time to say "The SNC execs with their balls in Trudeau's mouth have a court-documented history of bribing politicians." Easy peasy. 

It's hidden from only 1% who don't care and that makes all the difference?  And I'm sick and need help because I don't subscribe to your weird hyperbole.

You figure you're in the thalweg of Canada's mainstream?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

It's hidden from only 1% who don't care and that makes all the difference?  And I'm sick and need help because I don't subscribe to your weird hyperbole.

You figure you're in the thalweg of Canada's mainstream?

It's hidden from everyone, and 99% of the population would care if they knew about it. You're part of the 1% who will never care about Trudeau's scandals, but you should still be exposed to the information. Get it?

If I didn't post here, you wouldn't know that SNC has a court-documented history of giving millions of dollars to officials to help them win contracts in Canada.

You wouldn't know that covid deaths didn't go down at all after the massive vax-rollout and all of the Pflacebo mandates.

You wouldn't know that 86% of all of the covid deaths this year were among the multi-vaxed. 

Why do some of the most important/relevant facts of this decade have to get to you through me? Don't you watch the news? Yes, you do, but they don't tell you these things. You need to read my threads to find out wtf is happening in your own country, but instead of thanking me you snivel like a small child and tell me lies.

Go f yourself eyeball. I don't really care what you think about the information that I present here. If you're not man enough to wrap your head around it I'm not clueless enough to care. I just have to continually put you in your place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WestCanMan said:

It's hidden from everyone, and 99% of the population would care if they knew about it. You're part of the 1% who will never care about Trudeau's scandals, but you should still be exposed to the information. Get it?

How many times have you seen me reference SNC and Trudeau when talking about the lack of transparency in our government the last couple years?

You don't need to try so hard to appear as dumb as a dog's dick but kudos for effort in any case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Go f yourself eyeball. I don't really care what you think about the information that I present here. 

That's alright 95% of it's crap so no loss there. As for the other 5% that isn't it's usually old well-known news that's past its relevance date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, eyeball said:

That's alright 95% of it's crap so no loss there. As for the other 5% that isn't it's usually old well-known news that's past its relevance date.

Are you pretending that you knew 86% of Canadian covid deaths this year were among the multi-vaxed? That you knew covid deaths aren't down from pre-vax totals? That you knew about Michel Fournier's guilty plea? 

BS. You're such a worthless liar. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Are you pretending that you knew 86% of Canadian covid deaths this year were among the multi-vaxed?

Nope. I haven't seen anything but your hooey that suggests that.

Quote

That you knew covid deaths aren't down from pre-vax totals?

I not pretending that I'm aware of old news.

Quote

That you knew about Michel Fournier's guilty plea?

Nope, there's need to pretend about that either.

Quote

BS. You're such a worthless liar.

No, you're just helplessly confused, 5 years out of date and filled to the brim with yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Is this a transparency issue eyeball? You're so clueless. 

The issue is the lack of transparency - the only thing we really know for sure is that politicians love keeping things secretIt's been like this forever but it always seems to take you 5 years for it to sink in and then you imagine you're the only one who's woke to it.  You're so special that way.  

Edited by eyeball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Nope. I haven't seen anything but your hooey that suggests that.

It's not "my hooey", it's data extracted from Health Canada's own website.

If you're not smart enough to understand the math after I explained it to you, that's not something you should be bragging about. (It just proves that you're stoopid)

Quote

I not pretending that I'm aware of old news.

So can you show me where CTV and CBC reported on that fact then? You say that you're aware of it, and you already admitted that you're not smart enough to interpret graphs yourself, so when did the news make you aware of that fact?

Quote

Nope, there's need to pretend about that either.

So what do you have to say about the fact that CBC and CTV were well aware of the fact that SNC has a court-documented history of bribing Canadian officials but they never mentioned it while they were talking about the SNC scandal and all of the work that Trudeau did for them in terms of getting a law created for them and exerting pressure on the AG to go to bat for them? 

Can you admit that it's troubling? Cause for concern? 

Quote

No, you're just helplessly confused, 5 years out of date and filled to the brim with yourself.

You owe me a thank you, eyeball. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The issue is the lack of transparency - the only thing we really know for sure is that politicians love keeping things secretIt's been like this forever but it always seems to take you 5 years for it to sink in and then you imagine you're the only one who's woke to it.  You're so special that way.  

OMG, you're missing the whole point.

Politicians shouldn't poach from the public purse, that's the main issue. The second issue is that the PM shouldn't be giving taxpayer money to a false charity in exchange for propagandizing children. Buying off the media with taxpayer money is issue 3.  Transparency is issue #4 at best. If the PMO wasn't a criminal syndicate to begin with then we wouldn't be concerned about the RCMP's ability to investigate. We wouldn't even know it was an issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

OMG, you're missing the whole point.

Politicians shouldn't poach from the public purse, that's the main issue. The second issue is that the PM shouldn't be giving taxpayer money to a false charity in exchange for propagandizing children. Buying off the media with taxpayer money is issue 3.  Transparency is issue #4 at best. If the PMO wasn't a criminal syndicate to begin with then we wouldn't be concerned about the RCMP's ability to investigate. We wouldn't even know it was an issue. 

You, plus a bunch of other people keep missing the point, when they're not skating around it, that better transparency would make all this harder for politicians to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, eyeball said:

The hooey is what you added to their data.

So where do you figure Hunter's laptop factors into this?

I didn't "add" anything to their data.

I compared the rolling month-month totals to extract the data from within that specific time frame. 

It's another one of those things that I figured out myself, but you can't understand even after it's explained to you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, eyeball said:

You, plus a bunch of other people keep missing the point, when they're not skating around it, that better transparency would make all this harder for politicians to do.

There's no lack of transparency issue here, everyone knows exactly what happened (minus a few details the media refuses to talk about). We just can't make the media or the leftard horde care that Trudeau committed the biggest scandals in Canadian political history. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

I didn't "add" anything to their data.

I compared the rolling month-month totals to extract the data from within that specific time frame. 

It's another one of those things that I figured out myself, but you can't understand even after it's explained to you. 

I understand perfectly what you did and why. It's because you refuse to acknowledge that fallacy in your perception I explained to you way way back on the first page of your 1st thread on the topic. Nothing has changed since.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

There's no lack of transparency issue here, everyone knows exactly what happened (minus a few details the media refuses to talk about). We just can't make the media or the leftard horde care that Trudeau committed the biggest scandals in Canadian political history. 

You can't make people you hate care much about anything you say.

In any case whatever details you think are missing is moot now it's all behind us. The conservative horde has had plenty of opportunities to bring about changes that would have prevented many of the things that lead to scandals, fake news, misinformation and the hate and divisivness these lead too.

Maybe that's why Conservatives don't do any more than they need to make things more transparent they rely on hate and divisiveness for their traction.  People like you are all they have to work with. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I understand perfectly what you did and why. It's because you refuse to acknowledge that fallacy in your perception I explained to you way way back on the first page of your 1st thread on the topic. Nothing has changed since.

The distance that you're able to cram your head up your ass is legendary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

You can't make people you hate care much about anything you say.

In any case whatever details you think are missing is moot now it's all behind us. The conservative horde has had plenty of opportunities to bring about changes that would have prevented many of the things that lead to scandals, fake news, misinformation and the hate and divisivness these lead too.

Maybe that's why Conservatives don't do any more than they need to make things more transparent they rely on hate and divisiveness for their traction.  People like you are all they have to work with. 

The issue that we were talking here is that the media lied by omission

The media knew something that was completely relevant, pertinent, and highly important to tell Canadians so that we could have a full grasp of the depth of this scandal, but they chose to withhold that key piece of information from us. 

That's called "lying by omission."

CTV and CBC lied by omission.

I imagine Global covered the story too, but I never bothered to look and see if they knew about Michel Fournier as well. They probably did, if you wanna know, you can Google it. My opinin of Global won't change either way, they're as bad as the other two. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

The issue that we were talking here is that the media lied by omission.

Prove it. With the email trails, whistle-blowers and taped recording of discussions of collusion you say took place between the PMO, and the editorial rooms of the CTV/CBC/Global etc.

A lot of lobbying would have been needed to make this work. Do you have any public record of these meetings or when they took place? There's an official registry for that you know. Have you looked?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, eyeball said:
 

Another fallacious ad hominem right on queue.

You didn't have a point to respond to or I would have done that. All you did there was reiterate that you still don't understand basic math. 

What did you want me to do, try to explain subtraction and division to you again? 

The numbers I give you are Health Canada's own numbers, plain and simple. The numbers I showed you are 100% correct, they are  just derived with simple basic math which you just don't understand. @Hodad actually understands that math, get him to explain it to you. 

His only hangup is that he found some stats that say vaxed people are far more likely to get infected than the unvaxed, so the fact that their percentage of covid deaths is directly proportional to their percent of the population isn't a big deal because they have a higher survival rate

An example of his math is like this:

Out of 100,000 Canadians there were 85,000 fully vaxed people. They got 60,000 infections resulting in only 850 deaths, which is an impressive survival rate. Among the 15,000 unvaxed in that same group of 100,000 Canadians they were only proven to have 500 infections which resulted in 150 deaths, which is a lower survival rate. So in each group 1/100 people died overall, which is exactly equal, but the survival rate among known infections was higher so the vax was a huge success. 

Medical professionals sometimes talk in terms of CFR, case fatality rate, which is an important stat when you have to take a reasonable large sample size and extrapolate that data to estimate what the entire country's data would look like. That's a medical reality in most instances, like for example when covid hasn't gotten here yet and we know the CFR in a different region. For sure let's see what would happen when that got to Canada.

In this case however, when you're already dealing with the stats for the entire population that you care about (our whole country), CFR is no longer useful because there's no extrapolation required. We already know how many people were exposed to covid in our country for an entire month (over 38M people both groups had an equal chance of getting infected, because they're spread evenly across the country) and how many died in each group. That's literally all you need to know. It's the final "rubber meets the road" stat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

You didn't have a point to respond to or I would have done that. All you did there was reiterate that you still don't understand basic math. 

What did you want me to do, try to explain subtraction and division to you again?

No, because whatever calculations you added to Health Canada's your intent is to get around the base rate fallacy you're blind to.  Factor that in and all your math is so much superfluous hooey.

Edited by eyeball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

What did you want me to do, try to explain subtraction and division to you again? 

No the only one who needs anything explained to them here is you.  This explains what your mistake is and why you're so confused as a result.

Quote

COVID-19 vaccines work — misreading the data can make you think otherwise

Israel’s data shows that the COVID-19 vaccine works, but only if it’s analyzed correctly: the unfortunate story of the base rate fallacy.

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/569730-covid-19-vaccines-work-misreading-the-data-can-make-you-think-otherwise/

Search the phrase base rate fallacy and you will find more and more of the same and especially how it relates to COVID and vaccine effectiveness.

You're by no means unique in your confusion.  

Quote

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

It's the final "rubber meets the road" stat. 

Indeed.  Whether Eyeball wants to admit it or not....it's happening.

I just posted a recent study on the Trickle thread, you should have a look at.  It explains WHY everything you're pointing out is happening.  It seems we now have the mechanism for why the vaccinated are contracting covid over and over and the unvaccinated are not.

The question is whether we can un-do what we've done to billions of immune systems.

There are meetings all over Twitter Space Rooms happening tonight and tomorrow night.  Wonderful to see it being discussed and not buried and censored.

Censorship kills.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Prove it. With the email trails, whistle-blowers and taped recording of discussions of collusion you say took place between the PMO, and the editorial rooms of the CTV/CBC/Global etc.

A lot of lobbying would have been needed to make this work. Do you have any public record of these meetings or when they took place? There's an official registry for that you know. Have you looked?

It is already proven. 

1) You're an MSM sycophant and you weren't exposed to the information in all of your googly eyed news-watching

2) I proved that CBC and CTV had the info, because I showed you their own reporting on it. 

They had the info, you never got it. Capiche? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,770
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Akalupenn
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...