Replies

I've read your explanation that because this age group got vaccinated first, and because this age group is more likely to die anyway, then the increase is a consequence of this age group's tendency to die at a higher rate than average, which you say is creating the illusion that the vaccines are causing this.

I've no idea where you got that explanation but it wasn't from me. My explanation is the one the researchers provided in a footnote which Berenson ignored:

"9. For the 10-59 age group, the vaccinated population will on average be older than the unvaccinated population due to age-based prioritisation in the vaccine roll-out. As mortality rates are higher for older people, this will increase the mortality rates for the vaccinated population compared to the unvaccinated population."

Because people under 18 weren't eligible for the vaccine the vaccinated 10-59 population is on average significantly older than the unvaccinated 10-59 population. Older people have higher mortality. Perfectly straightforward.

...and Berenson may turn out to have actually exposed something.

Let me know when he has some evidence to back up his claims, until then he's just making stuff up and misleading people. Knowingly.

There is no such thing as "private property rights" when you are carrying millions of public communications.

Tell that to Jim.

Oh, that's right, you have the special pleader's notion of property rights - they only belong to the people you agree with politically.

That's a concept, just not a conservative one.

I've no idea where you got that explanation but it wasn't from me. My explanation is the one the researchers provided in a footnote which Berenson ignored:

Twilight zone moment for me here. *You* pointed out the footnote, which I believe says exactly as I described. In my comprehension, that makes it *YOUR* point, even though it is a footnote from someone else.

Tell that to Jim.

Jim does not carry millions of messages per day. He is also not a public communications system, he is a private club with membership. He identifies his organization as an explicitly conservative political club.

Were he carrying millions of messages a day, and were these effectively public communications, and were he advertised as being neutral or non political, I would be demanding that he be made to obey a non censorship law too.

That's a concept, just not a conservative one.

Allowing us to be made into Jews in 1930s Germany is also not a conservative one, because to uphold conservative ideas, you have to survive.

Your ideas will kill us. They will literally cause the deaths of everyone disagreeing with the state. This vaccine censorship crap is going down that road right now.