What would be the bar to calling something "credible evidence?"
Here is an article from January 22, 2022, Investigation finds 300% increase in Worldwide Heart Attack Deaths among Soccer Players in 2021.
Doing a text search of the thread, I don't see your screen name in the comments, so I don't know if you saw that article or not.
I'm curious about your take on it.
-PJ
I've seen that article posted before.
Here's the basis of their headline claim of an increase in heart attacks in 2021: List of association footballers who died while playing.
It's a Wikipedia page where random people can add someone to the list, usually based on some news report they read.
Now the most obvious problem with this is we have no idea what percentage of events were recorded in each year. Was the community updating this Wiki as active in 2020 as in 2021 or did this vaccine controversy cause a much higher percentage of reported deaths to be put on this Wikipedia list?
We have a good clue from FIFA. After all, these are all supposedly deaths from FIFA association clubs.
So we have an entire article based on absolutely unreliable data - in fact, the Wikipedia page in question explicitly states that it's an incomplete list of deaths - while the organization where all of these deaths occurred says there's nothing unusual happening.
My take is it's exceptionally shoddy work but par for the course for the Daily Expose.
What's your take on it?