“data for 2020 shows doctors in Canada aged 50 and under die at a rate of about 6 per year.
After the latest booster, 6 Canadian doctors, 50 and under, died within a 15 day period.”
I’m sorry, but this is too small of a sample size to make any relevant conclusions. Kirsch should know better.
That the CMA has scrubbed all of the earlier data (it had been available back until 2015 until fairly recently) which would provided a much better baseline and has stopped updating should lead one to conclude that “there is nothing to see”
If someone might post the appropriate graphic, I’d be appreciative.
The sample size would be the number of doctors in Canada. What is that number?
Mr. Kirsch appears to be suggesting that doctors are uniquely vulnerable to the deleterious effects of the vaccines.
That’s weird, as Canadians are among the most vaccinated people in the world at this point, not just their doctors.
I ran some numbers using the data presented here. Expected annual deaths = 6, deaths in 15 days = 6. Assumed a binomial distribution, and that deaths are distributed uniformly throughout the year.
Doesn’t matter much what the population is. The odds of a concentration like this are about 75,000 to 1.
Since the sample was selected, I don’t consider this overwhelming evidence. But I don’t think we have to ignore it, either.
Note that if there had been 10 deaths, for example, the odds would have been considerably higher - about 100 billion to 1.