Yeah....that one was not a good analogy, BB.
And, we had a dear friend who passed, in his sleep, the night of his first shot. He was on no meds and up and around chasing his grands, enjoying family, etc., in the days prior. Also, stroke/heart attack reports, of the vexed, are likely as suppressed as the actual/real china flu infection numbers.
“Yeah....that one was not a good analogy” (winning on a lottery ticket, after having received vaccine)
It is a good analogy of the Post Hoc fallacy.
That which simply comes before, can not be concluded to have caused that which comes after.
This analogy clearly shows can be absolutely no causative relationship, despite the correlation.
It is a good analogy, because it is so obvious, that there is no causation.
Of course there are strokes after vaccination. That alone does not mean that vaccination caused them.
Vaccination does not make people immune to strokes. They will continue to occur. The sun will rise, whether or not the cock crows (bagster’s analogy, in which he apparently unwittingly made the point of the Post Hoc fallacy, not supporting his own premise of correlation proving causation of strokes by vaccine).
If there were significantly more strokes than would be expected randomly, that would be evidence of a potential problem.
But there are not.
Really, a physiological mechanism of action would have to be identified, and the incidence would have have to high enough above the average, to make a rational argument against using these vaccines. Neither is the case.