Replies

I think that's right, and the way to get the fact checkers to focus on the real issue is to focus on the real issue, and not lie about what the CDC is claiming.

And I don't think lie is too strong a word. The vaccinated population had a lower risk of death by accidents & homicide. If the CDC is saying that "after you get vaccinated" your risk of accidents "drops" then they would be insane and you wouldn't even need to discuss anything else they say. Which is the way this author would like us to react. But they didn't say that. Indeed they specifically said the opposite by referring to the healthy vaccinee effect. So the headline of the article is a lie.

As far as lies on this topic go, I think “2 weeks to flatten the curve”, “racist to think this came from Wuhan”, “there are no other treatments besides the jab”, “pandemic of the un-vaxxinated”, and ... the concluding statement of this report, are all more serious lies.

This is a source of fun making it look like a “self-own” on the part of the CDC nerds. I don’t think there is a “Well, aktually...” that gets them out of the deceptiveness of this. If they had explained the report clearly, it would have watered down whatever deceptive point they were trying to make.

Since the vaccines were narrowly targeted to deal with the original strain of Covid-19, and are progressively less effective against newer strains, the claim of a generalized health benefit from the vaccines would need to be justified by positing some specific cause-effect relationship at the cellular level. Did the CDC establish what that relationship is?

Too many other possibilities exist, e.g., the vaccinated are generally in better health; the vaccinated have better access to good health care; the vaccinated are more pro-active in taking care of themselves; and - more controversially - the statistics have been selected and/or manipulated to show the desired result.

Ahh, I see what your problem is.

(from the article)

The CDC just released an analysis that after you get vaccinated, your all-cause mortality drops by 72% if you are age 18-44. Since 33% of deaths in that age group are from accidents, that means that it drives death from ALL diseases to ZERO and it ALSO reduces chance of dying in an accident.

The author is saying that, if the CDC is correct and 'all-cause' mortality drops by 72% for the vaccinated, ages 18-44, then it would have to follow that the figure drives deaths from ALL DISEASES to ZERO and ALSO would have to reduce the chances of dying in an accident. Which, as we all know, is completely ridiculous, thereby exposing the CDC study numbers as bogosity of the highest order.

Nobody is saying that, other than the CDC's bogus numbers. The author is merely pointing out how impossible that is.

You are looking for nits where there are none, simply to call tis article click bait and support your boy Fauci.

Get over yourself, and go look for another thread to scream CLICKBAIT!!! on. You're played out on this one.

Or you could tell the one about moving to Japan again. I like that story.