Strategy for manipulating the population and opinion in 10 rules

[ABC2019]

(Gnégnégnagna, you're not even heading, eh, sir "practically 100%" ... where does the clown think he is? )

so ... only insults, without any argument ... JOGGER style what ...

[ABC2019]

no, we are talking about the case fatality rate. All other things being equal, vaccination slows progression and decreases case fatality. We can reduce the number of deaths by means other than vaccination, of course.

Ok. But we already get this result by vaccinating only those most at risk. No need to go and vaccinate others to obtain this result, nor to impose it, nor to have a health pass.

do you have reliable data to say that vaccinating others is useless?

Moreover, this is what we did in 2020, we managed to stop 2 waves without vaccination. But with more restrictive measures.

Is that so. We will have to get out of the sources of the effectiveness of social and political measures then, and explain to us why certain specialists dispute their usefulness ....

all the "specialists who dispute its usefulness" have themselves been challenged, how do you know who is right in a debate like this one?

[izentrop]

because in India they are not vaccinated, but neither do they die. Once again, we do not understand everything.

Are you talking about official numbers or real numbers?

The analysis, from the Center for Global Development, a think tank in Washington, DC, examines the number of "excess deaths" that occurred in India between January 2020 and June 2021 - in other words, how many more people have died in the country. during this period than during a similar period in 2019 or other recent years.

Using death data from vital records and other sources, the report developed three estimates for undercount. The conclusion is that between 3,4 and 4,7 million more people have died during this pandemic period than expected. This is up to 10 times higher than the Indian government's official death toll of 414. https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandso ... 9176688960

[Rajqawee]

no, we are talking about the case fatality rate. All other things being equal, vaccination slows progression and decreases case fatality. We can reduce the number of deaths by means other than vaccination, of course.

Ok. But we already get this result by vaccinating only those most at risk. No need to go and vaccinate others to obtain this result, nor to impose it, nor to have a health pass.

do you have reliable data to say that vaccinating others is useless?

Moreover, this is what we did in 2020, we managed to stop 2 waves without vaccination. But with more restrictive measures.

Is that so. We will have to get out of the sources of the effectiveness of social and political measures then, and explain to us why certain specialists dispute their usefulness ....

all the "specialists who dispute its usefulness" have themselves been challenged, how do you know who is right in a debate like this one?

I do not know. That's why I'm saying you have to know, before imposing restrictions of this nature.

[ABC2019]

I do not know. That's why I'm saying you have to know, before imposing restrictions of this nature.

So the fact that you don't know, you interpret it by the fact that nobody knows?

Do you think you have a sufficient level of knowledge of the subject to KNOW that we are wrong, or do you know nothing but it is your prejudice?

[Obamot]

One thing is certain, it is that ABC believes to have a sufficient level, but it only believes it ...

So let's resume. I do not go back on my joke, a joke, it cannot be explained. Either it was a bad joke, or we didn't understand it!

Regarding the risk benefit.

For the belt;
Risk: none. Possible minor and temporary discomfort.
Benefit: Huge gain in luck in the event of certain accidents.

Conclusion: the benefit being either zero or certain, the expectation is positive, the risk being zero / negligible, putting on the seat belt is a priori always a good idea.

For the vaccine;
Risk: discussed and uncertain. Goes from severe reactions (rare a priori, but unpredictable at the individual level) to painful (a few very woozy days), to mild.
Benefit: discussed and uncertain. At the individual level, ranges from almost zero to significant depending on the age group. At the collective level, is also discussed for its effect on contagions.

Conclusion: it depends. At the individual level, everyone's situation can change. A healthy 25-year-old earns very little and risks very little. Reading also changes depending on his lifestyle. A 65-year-old earns a lot and risks very little. Seems like a good idea.
For the collective level, it still remains to prove that the vaccine makes it possible to bring the R of the virus below 1, which is not currently the case, we do not observe a clear correlation (example, Israel at 1.46, Iceland at 1.07, India at 0.95, France at 1.12, UK at 1.01, Tunisia 0.77. Source Ourworldindata)

I am generally against this opinion, which does not start from scientific considerations, but from the current usual rhetoric. Better yet, Me di Vizio spoke on a legal level:

health-pollution-prevention / d-raoult-would-replace-al-ihu-end-aout-2021-t16966-20.html # p461948

he said that for 1 year and a half the media have been talking about covid from morning to night, when in reality they know 0, x

It is also behind the greatest caution that I have taken refuge since last year, having held firm to say that there had been no excess mortality in 2020, that rt-PCR tests were inappropriate for patients. mass tests (against thick and thin) and the best statisticians have proved me right ... and now the subject would have become almost banal ...
So in your place, it wouldn't be wrong to doubt Ourworldindata sucks ... 1,5 years of fake-news ... let's be serious! There is better way to form a drinking opinion: society-and-philosophy / population-manipulation-and-opinion-strategy-in-10-rules-t10016-330.html # p461728

[Janic]

abcon

For causality, I'll let you give us your explanations on the cause of this correlation.

this has already been done, you just have to reread your .... 9.000 messages!

[reinoso]

blatant JOGGER-style lie - or quote a single post that showed this?

if you don't see any lessons quickly consult an ophthalmologist

this is not an admissible answer, I am not asking to cite other sources, I am asking in which of my posts is that I have told a lie.

I give you a 100% false wholesale price see the above pdf with the referenced sources

[ABC2019]

if you don't see any lessons quickly consult an ophthalmologist

this is not an admissible answer, I am not asking to cite other sources, I am asking in which of my posts is that I have told a lie.

I give you a 100% false wholesale price see the above pdf with the referenced sources

it's still not a valid answer, so it's libel.

But hey we're just on one forum, not in court, so we can afford to accuse and defame without proof, it costs nothing. Have fun!

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

(Bozo in his new issue: "It's not admissible" with his new variant "It's still not admissible", laughter guaranteed!)