Tell you what. Why don’t you explain why you don’t limit your denominator to the age group that dies? Explain why you do that according to all sources over 2 years and we can let people evaluate your methodological purity.
Why are you talking about 5 yr old transmitters after you just quoted your bizarre death stats including in them people who don’t generally die. Pregnancy rates among men are low, so lets include men in the calculation of population pregnancy rates? How can you not see your bias?
First, you did not offer any sources of your own. So this rachet of questions is merely a sort of avoidance to me. A parade of questions is not an answer to an earlier question. But then you know that.
1) “Why don't you explain why you don't limit your denominator to the age group that dies?”
The data collections’ brute data does not offer it. Do you have a source that does? We could follow that train of thought. But to use population as a denominator consistently in looking at various nations, data, there would be comparable results.
Please cite your data sources which break apart populations by age groups, and please define the age cutoff which you use to define “vulnerable.”
2) “Explain why you do that according to all sources over 2 years and we can let people evaluate your methodological purity.”
Such an obvious answer. The global and national death tolls are reported as an additive total, and I take the Corman-Drosten coding of the PCR test for SARS CoV2 was written in January of 2020.
What “methodological purity” is yours, other than to keep asserting and questioning? Please provide from what date you begin the total of deaths, if different than mine. Please provide URLS that we may all look at both our data sources.
3) “Why are you talking about 5 yr old transmitters after you just quoted your bizarre death stats including in them people who don't generally die.”
“...people who don't generally die” in death stats?” I confess to not understanding your assertion.
As to the remaining, 5year olds in the US are being involved in the 23-month “event” as they are being inoculated with experimental mRNA gene therapies in continuing phase three clinical trials wherein the manufacturers of these inoculations are shielded from civil liability,
Moreover in the UK infants are being experimented on. That seems horrid to me. Does it to you?
The premise for these experiments on children and infants is that they can harbor the virus, and transmit. Moreover, the “vaccinated” now when ill are described as “breakthrough,” and the justification for one booster in the US and more than one in other nations is that these “experiments” wane.
Having answered your questions, will you answer mine?