Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Player dying the field in Cincinnati
Comments
-
Great questions. Were any asked of the CV jab trials?whatshouldicareabout said:
Is it peer reviewed? It's listed as "letter to editor".EsophagealFeces said:
Don't bring medical studies and peer reviewed papers into this. The libs don't deal in facts, only emotions.Dude61 said:
Letter uses absolute values instead of rates. How many athletes were in sports in 1966-2004 versus 2020-2022?
What was the source of statistics for those years? Are they comparable in how they were taken? How reliable are those statistics? Where is the data for 2005-2019?
What types of sports had the highest rate of cardiac injury? What about race?
No need to answer.
The fact that Pfizer asked a federal judge to withhold answers for 75 years says it all.
In this case, the author Dr Peter McCullough is the top cardiologist in the country. With over 600 peer-reviewed, published papers on his resume he is head and shoulders above the field. I think it's fair to say he's earned a bit of discretion if those questions aren't perfectly addressed (but likely are given his track record).
I really hope this helps.
-
Speaking of pressing. Plausible deniability by virtue of the Limited Scope Fallacy is one of my favorites.YellowSnow said:
It's as if the only variable introduced into the scientific experiment of the past several years are the mRNA vaccines themselves. An infectious disease that most have had by now could not possible play a role.LawDawg1 said:As stated in another post.... how does the argument ignore the fact COVID19 has shown to also increase heart inflammation and myocarditis? Unless you can establish that an athlete (1) had the Vaxx and (2) never had COVID19, these studies or data points are meaningless. Was it the vaxx? Was it prior exposure to COVID? Was it something else? I hate the pro and anti-vaxxers.... but these arguments lack logic.
-
Like looking into election fraud, some people don't want to ask and don't want to know. Statistical anomalies can be just that. They can also direct an intellectually curious person into further investigation. When the first party strongly resists that investigation, that is further evidence that there should be an investigation - a real investigation.pawz said:
Great questions. Were any asked of the CV jab trials?whatshouldicareabout said:
Is it peer reviewed? It's listed as "letter to editor".EsophagealFeces said:
Don't bring medical studies and peer reviewed papers into this. The libs don't deal in facts, only emotions.Dude61 said:
Letter uses absolute values instead of rates. How many athletes were in sports in 1966-2004 versus 2020-2022?
What was the source of statistics for those years? Are they comparable in how they were taken? How reliable are those statistics? Where is the data for 2005-2019?
What types of sports had the highest rate of cardiac injury? What about race?
No need to answer.
The fact that Pfizer asked a federal judge to withhold answers for 75 years says it all.
In this case, the author Dr Peter McCullough, is the top cardiologist in the country. With over 600 peer-reviewed, published papers on his resume he is head and shoulders above the field. I think it's fair to say he's earned a bit of discretion if those questions aren't perfectly addressed (but likely are given his track record).
I really hope this helps. -
You need me to think I'm humiliated because you'll never be my equal and that bothers you.Sources said:
This is a little ironic coming from mr. group chatbackthepack said:
Ahhh, a low IQ with a dash of narcissism. That's always a special combination.RoadTrip said:
I have no idea what 8chan is. The text we received was from a young man at the university of Georgia. His father is an exec at ESPN. You need me to think I'm humiliated because you'll never be my equal and that bothers you.ntxduck said:
A person with a >than room temperature iq would take this opportunity of being publicly humiliated to reflect internally and take a serious look at the unreliable sources of info they are being fed.RoadTrip said:Text we received had to be wrong. Hopefully the young man recovers soon. If he does, medical heros and technology will have saved his life.
I’m going to bet you’ll just dive deeper down the 8chan rabbit hole though.
-
Likely a copypasta, but we agree in that I’ll never be your equalbackthepack said:
You need me to think I'm humiliated because you'll never be my equal and that bothers you.Sources said:
This is a little ironic coming from mr. group chatbackthepack said:
Ahhh, a low IQ with a dash of narcissism. That's always a special combination.RoadTrip said:
I have no idea what 8chan is. The text we received was from a young man at the university of Georgia. His father is an exec at ESPN. You need me to think I'm humiliated because you'll never be my equal and that bothers you.ntxduck said:
A person with a >than room temperature iq would take this opportunity of being publicly humiliated to reflect internally and take a serious look at the unreliable sources of info they are being fed.RoadTrip said:Text we received had to be wrong. Hopefully the young man recovers soon. If he does, medical heros and technology will have saved his life.
I’m going to bet you’ll just dive deeper down the 8chan rabbit hole though. -
That's the thing, the British study was in fact discussed here but largely dismissed because myocarditis rates and severity were much high higher through covid infection than they were through vaccination. It's like, yeah, we know that but it's better than the alternativeYellowSnow said:
It's as if the only variable introduced into the scientific experiment of the past several years are the mRNA vaccines themselves. An infectious disease that most have had by now could not possible play a role.LawDawg1 said:As stated in another post.... how does the argument ignore the fact COVID19 has shown to also increase heart inflammation and myocarditis? Unless you can establish that an athlete (1) had the Vaxx and (2) never had COVID19, these studies or data points are meaningless. Was it the vaxx? Was it prior exposure to COVID? Was it something else? I hate the pro and anti-vaxxers.... but these arguments lack logic.
-
I'm fine. Never tested never vaxxedwhatshouldicareabout said:
Is it peer reviewed? It's listed as "letter to editor".EsophagealFeces said:
Don't bring medical studies and peer reviewed papers into this. The libs don't deal in facts, only emotions.Dude61 said:
Letter uses absolute values instead of rates. How many athletes were in sports in 1966-2004 versus 2020-2022?
What was the source of statistics for those years? Are they comparable in how they were taken? How reliable are those statistics? Where is the data for 2005-2019?
What types of sports had the highest rate of cardiac injury? What about race? -
What I'm getting here is its still fine to blame the kitchen sink on covid but we need to be hyper careful about saying anything about the vac
A lot of you will never move off the thinking that crushed the economy for no reason
Good luck the rest of the way -
From your King County overlords. Regardless if this is vaccine related or not, pushing it on young people was fucking stupid. In theory, unlimited risk with no reward.
-
Grim
