Message from @the21cat
Discord ID: 586335087105146900
Yeah ill need an autopsy report before that can be validated as true
you anti-vaxxers please give me one reason why i shouldn't vaccinate my kids
A quote from the father of scientific population control, Thomas Malthusian, serves as a reminder of the true intentions of some scientists and social engineering programs:
“Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague.
“In the country, we should build our villages near stagnant pools, and particularly encourage settlements in all marshy and unwholesome situations.*12 But above all, we should reprobate specific remedies for ravaging diseases; and those benevolent, but much mistaken men, who have thought they were doing a service to mankind by projecting schemes for the total extirpation of particular disorders.
“If by these and similar means the annual mortality were increased from 1 in 36 or 40, to 1 in 18 or 20, we might probably every one of us marry at the age of puberty, and yet few be absolutely starved.” ~ Thomas Malthus, An Essay on the Principle of Population, 1826
SOUNDS FAMILIAR
If you like authority, you're a happy and willing slave.
Im going through the 157 papers right now and i already see a problem in the first one. The whole point of a 95% confidentiality range is to see if the difference in 2 sets of data are due ti chance. If the ranges overlap there is no significant statistical difference between the two. When you say there is a connection between the 2 and you give ranges overlapping thats just not understanding how to use 95% confidentiality. In other words the experiment supports no connection between the 2.
I realize this is going to take a long time but im going to go through them all anyways until i find one that works
2. Nothing wrong with this paper more of a user error though
They come to the conclusion based off of an anonymous survey that vaccinated kids are more likely to have certain neurological diseases. HOWEVER that is a big user error to assume that they were caused by thr vaccines because there is one thing being forgotten: the sample size could very well be biased to one side. If people who are more likely to get a vaccine but because they have these diseases already then people with autism could be more likely to get vaccinated. Unfortunately we cant make that claim either because the reverse could be true.
So in other words the paper says nothing
3 is the exact same problem
4 same problem as 1. I thought it would be a good study especially because thats what health institute's tell pregnant women to avoid but they found the opposite result and supported the opposite claim they should have. I dont understand why its difficult. This is literally the first thing we learned in my class and the ap biology test uses this overlapping range to try to screw people up especially with bar graphs but people are just being dumb and not looking at there data. Also its a different topic anyways
5 support the experiment but not directly connected to vaccines. Also to any antivaxxers this paper is directing you to use mercury arguements not aluminium. Actually aluminium causing autism is basically destroyed. If youre interested in what to look for check 5. Of course this means youll have to check if mercury accumulation prevents mercury detoxification but it has the most potential so far. Still not proven or definite evidence just a leading direction
6 would love to check 6 but they dont appear to give me any data so i have to assume their claim is unjustified. Got to give me more than an abstract. All the other ones do. Seems like it could be a legitimate experiment but they need actual data with it.
8 problem is rat brains and human brains are not similar enough to assume the results are the same. Legitament study
9 mice not people
10 interesting and weird. The rat arguement isnt actually valid in this case but the topic is not connected to mercury levels in vaccines and it is not tested to model levela of mercury in human vaccines or with ethylmercury or whatever is within the vaccines. But it does prove interesting with source 5 and 7
Also your thing is an online library not a scientific journal
yea of scientific papers lol
besides all you cite is government institutions which are know to lie and manipulate data so you got no real credible sources
that is a fact
i guess you forgot that
that is like taking a liar into a court room and trying to use them as a credible source of info
but you think the measles is deadly too
your too young to even know
come into voice
if you dare
Its not data manipulation. Its called understanding data. All these papers that missuse 95% confidence intervals should be thrown away. Its literally purposely missuing data to lie to the public
not it is called data manipulation
period
And measles is in most cases not deadly i never actually said it was
proof they do it
they do it in all fields