I investigate systems via data for a living. Correlations are the starting point of almost every step forward. It’s not always what it seems but they tell you where to look. So them not looking at correlations - avoiding them as they are waved in their face - tells you they’re not scientists or acting in good faith. They are frauds.
I investigate systems via data for a living. Correlations are the starting point of almost every step forward. It’s not always what it seems but they tell you where to look. So them not looking at correlations - avoiding them as they are waved in their face - tells you they’re not scientists or acting in good faith. They are frauds.
I'd be interested in your take on this man's studies. He finds the correlation between manufacturer batches and reported adverse events. It's very interesting. https://www.bitchute.com/channel/3KRJ7WXgSw8T/
I've seen it - it's so ridiculous that I would like to get the data myself and prove it, because I can't quite believe it. It reminds me of research I did once where I thought I was differentiating between diseases but I was actually differentiating between CT scanners ie. the people with each set of conditions were scanned on different machines.
Here, the batch and not the person is seems to be what's important. If the adverse outcome is indeed dependent on the batch in the systematic way he shows (ie. not somewhat random due to say poor quality control, but with regular patterns), then honestly the situation is much much worse than I think it is (and I'm not exactly optimistic now).
If this has been planned down to the minutest detail of particular batches, then we have our work cut out for us for a long time to come, if we survive.
I investigate systems via data for a living. Correlations are the starting point of almost every step forward. It’s not always what it seems but they tell you where to look. So them not looking at correlations - avoiding them as they are waved in their face - tells you they’re not scientists or acting in good faith. They are frauds.
I'd be interested in your take on this man's studies. He finds the correlation between manufacturer batches and reported adverse events. It's very interesting. https://www.bitchute.com/channel/3KRJ7WXgSw8T/
I've seen it - it's so ridiculous that I would like to get the data myself and prove it, because I can't quite believe it. It reminds me of research I did once where I thought I was differentiating between diseases but I was actually differentiating between CT scanners ie. the people with each set of conditions were scanned on different machines.
Here, the batch and not the person is seems to be what's important. If the adverse outcome is indeed dependent on the batch in the systematic way he shows (ie. not somewhat random due to say poor quality control, but with regular patterns), then honestly the situation is much much worse than I think it is (and I'm not exactly optimistic now).
If this has been planned down to the minutest detail of particular batches, then we have our work cut out for us for a long time to come, if we survive.
Exactly yes.