4 ms·
>Without vaccines the number of dead would be far, far higher than it ended up being based on what? 'projections' from sources that commissioned the cures and
by uwagar 3y ago
>Without vaccines the number of dead would be far, far higher than it ended up being
based on what? 'projections' from sources that commissioned the cures and the mandates? what to believe? who to believe? let's cue in data ambiguity and conflict of interest as among the reasons why this is happening.
most of the young people were not affected by the virus but had to lose key years of their life to save old people. they do feel let down.
- jacquesm 3y agoI suggest you look at the world wide statistics from before the vaccine roll-out and afterwards. There is nothing to 'believe', that data is about as non-ambiguous as it comes and you should be very, very grateful that those people spent their lives learning the skills required to save our collective asses, especially in light of the way their contributions are being minimized. And if you don't understand that then that's fine with me but that still doesn't mean that science has 'let you down'. You benefit from science every day of your life, even if you don't want to credit it.
- uwagar 3y agoactually british govt stopped publishing COVID infection/fatality data based on vaccination status because of risk of misintepretation :) ie a lot of folks that were vaccinated were getting [re-]infected and so on. i could dig the sources for you but i suppose we dont care anymore. the fact is people feel physically, spiritually and scientifically abused by the handlers of the pandemic. and they cant talk about it cos they still get downvoted or truncated out of discourse. so they are taking a different route to calm themselves down.
- jacquesm 3y agoI think you are just looking for reasons to believe what you want to believe. You don't speak for 'a lot of folks' you just speak for yourself.