Medical liability of doctors who would be involved in anti-Covid vaccination

[pedrodelavega]

Yes, and then the contradiction is in no way proven. Geneticist Alexandra henrion-Caude went to redo all the calculations - she said that she dug the details - of this sponsored study. She therefore reworked the Pfizer data to arrive at the figures she describes. Only top experts are able to do this finely enough.
And so it is not the figures that appear spontaneously in the tables! Rubbish. Don't take us for idiots.
Indeed, no figures given by the opponents (illustrious unknowns) do not correspond to her figures: none.
We cannot therefore deduce that it would have been mistaken, the opponents taking up again what Pfizer said gives it all. Mainstream nods who discovered the earth was flat because they were whispered in their ears with steaks

I do not understand what you are saying, she started from which figures, published where, to "redo the calculations", Alexandra henrion-Caude?

She says she left the Pfizer report. However, this report does not say that.

What I can't figure out is:
What is it?
ou
Is she blinded by her ideology?
ou
Does it not grow as it should up there?

[ABC2019]

in fact the figures are recalled in the tweet you gave:

Henrion clumsily manipulates yet clear figures see FDA report
1 in 20000 vaccinated people has developed a severe form, in the unvaccinated 9 people out of 20000. 162 Covid + in the unvaccinated compared to 8 in the vaccinated on the same number of patients.

therefore the vaccine has decreased by 9 the number of severe forms compared to the population.

But she does the math not in relation to the population, but in relation to the number of Covid + cases

1 in 8 in vaccinees
9 out of 162, or about 1 in 16 among the unvaccinated!

and suddenly she says that there are twice as many serious forms per patient among vaccinated!

the only thing this lady seems to ignore is that on the small numbers, there is enormous statistical uncertainty. A measured number of N is "statistically" affected by an uncertainty of the order of the root (N). 1 in 8 may very well be an average of 0,5 for 8, (i.e. once in two 1s and once in two zero on a sample of 8 people), so correspond to the SAME rate of 1 / 16 (in reality 9 is also marred by the uncertainty of + or - root (9) = 3 so it is between 6 and 12, so the rate of 1 to 16 is itself uncertain).

In reality, such small figures are very insufficient to know precisely the rate of severe forms, but the drop in the number of cases and severe cases is of course very significant statistically.

Okay, but before making all this understand to an average Sud radio listener ....

[Obamot]

Totally futile attempt AVC ... TOTALLY ... as with HCQ

She says she left the Pfizer report. However, this report does not say that.

What I can't figure out is:
What is it?
ou
Is she blinded by her ideology?
ou
Does it not grow as it should up there?

You are dead and buried: do you understand or are you autistic? ? ? *

And your attempts to manipulate it become pitiful.

This report does not can not give figures other than what he gives. You be surrounded bwana

You wouldn't imagine that having uncovered a deception, her figures would be similar to Pfizer

Unless you are completely barge ... (well no, not “unless” ... you're at a very advanced stage)



* Your determination not to criticize the methods of promoting vaccines without any scientific basis crucified you, due to the fact that you held an ultra-rigorous speech against hydroxychloroquine for months, while here you admit all the transgressions.

dead

dead

dead

[ABC2019]

it's okay you're better have you vomited?

[Obamot]

Basically, your squeaky interventions to you, to Pédro (or Simple) are NEVER to bring “solutions” to the questions asked in an honorable debate ... but ALWAYS to insult, provoke and elude or disappear when things are wrong. where you want it.

It is glorious your pseudo-science.

[Remundo]

2 official warnings awarded
* in Obamot (which is TWO)
* and ABC (which is at THREE)

Reminder: everyone can put forward a point of view, but the gibes must stop.

[ABC2019]

2 official warnings awarded
* in Obamot (which is TWO)
* and ABC (which is at THREE)

Reminder: everyone can put forward a point of view, but the gibes must stop.

if Obamot's message deserves a warning, then what is wrong with mine? it's a kind of vomit that he spills on each of his insulting posts, isn't it? otherwise why do you warn him?

[ABC2019]

Basically, your squeaky interventions to you, to Pédro (or Simple) are NEVER to bring “solutions” to the questions asked in an honorable debate ... but ALWAYS to insult, provoke and elude or disappear when things are wrong. where you want it.

It is glorious your pseudo-science.

all coffee.

It goes like this ?

[pedrodelavega]

2 official warnings awarded
* in Obamot (which is TWO)
* and ABC (which is at THREE)

Reminder: everyone can put forward a point of view, but the gibes must stop.

if Obamot's message deserves a warning, then what is wrong with mine? it's a kind of vomit that he spills on each of his insulting posts, isn't it? otherwise why do you warn him?

If you find his message insulting, there is a report button for it.
On the other hand, if you also answer it with an insult, well ...

[ABC2019]

2 official warnings awarded
* in Obamot (which is TWO)
* and ABC (which is at THREE)

Reminder: everyone can put forward a point of view, but the gibes must stop.

if Obamot's message deserves a warning, then what is wrong with mine? it's a kind of vomit that he spills on each of his insulting posts, isn't it? otherwise why do you warn him?

If you find his message insulting, there is a report button for it.
On the other hand, if you also answer it with an insult, well ...

"It's okay, you're better, did you vomit?" , for me, it's not an insult, that's what I said to my children nicely when they were nauseous!

but ok, message received, I will report all Obamot posts containing insults.

Are you ready for the mods?