this is completely invalid reasoning. Here's why:
1. If "majority of my social circles" are unvaccinated, but
2. Some of them are vaccinated, then
3. It stands to a reason that those vaccinated, have had GOOD REASON (at least PERCEIVED, perhaps WRONGLY, but nonetheless) to vaccinate - aka, a serious underlying health condition, advanced…
1. If "majority of my social circles" are unvaccinated, but
2. Some of them are vaccinated, then
3. It stands to a reason that those vaccinated, have had GOOD REASON (at least PERCEIVED, perhaps WRONGLY, but nonetheless) to vaccinate - aka, a serious underlying health condition, advanced age, frail, etc.
4. Thus, it is CLEARLY a "self-selecting sample" phenomenon, and CANNOT be used for ANY generalizations
So the people that were vaxxed had a serious underlying health condition, and the unvaxxed did not? Dude, if 100 of the 200 people drank heavily, and 33 got into an accident that day, and 7 died, and ZERO people who DIDN'T DRINK didn't get in an accident, it's the alcohol. Correct? Cause and effect. Even so, it's reason enough for a recall.
amusing how people don't see and argue against the obvious. The injections aren't good, they cause death and injury. This fact is indisputable. You are better off not to take the injections.
Yes, confounders must be accounted for. But it also works the other way. People who are on death's doorstep typically aren't jabbed. Neither are those who are ill. There are inherent biases both ways.
The interesting thing is that both very conservative and inclusive filtering of the results came up with similar ratios.
this is completely invalid reasoning. Here's why:
1. If "majority of my social circles" are unvaccinated, but
2. Some of them are vaccinated, then
3. It stands to a reason that those vaccinated, have had GOOD REASON (at least PERCEIVED, perhaps WRONGLY, but nonetheless) to vaccinate - aka, a serious underlying health condition, advanced age, frail, etc.
4. Thus, it is CLEARLY a "self-selecting sample" phenomenon, and CANNOT be used for ANY generalizations
you're a complete idjit. Most people got vaxxed in order to appease work, to travel freely.
So the people that were vaxxed had a serious underlying health condition, and the unvaxxed did not? Dude, if 100 of the 200 people drank heavily, and 33 got into an accident that day, and 7 died, and ZERO people who DIDN'T DRINK didn't get in an accident, it's the alcohol. Correct? Cause and effect. Even so, it's reason enough for a recall.
amusing how people don't see and argue against the obvious. The injections aren't good, they cause death and injury. This fact is indisputable. You are better off not to take the injections.
Yes, confounders must be accounted for. But it also works the other way. People who are on death's doorstep typically aren't jabbed. Neither are those who are ill. There are inherent biases both ways.
The interesting thing is that both very conservative and inclusive filtering of the results came up with similar ratios.