That’s interesting, because I have 30 years working in statistics and empirical modeling. I’m not a PhD or an expert, but I do understand the concept of signal vs noise. You know who our sharpest consultants are, in general? Masters degreed people. They tend to combine practical and theoretical well. Some of the PhDs are good too, but they often fail when looking at data which does not match their theory. I know all about massaging data, excluding outliers, having a sense of how human error + test equipment reproducibility affects model quality both from a steady state and dynamic sense. G.E.P Box once wrote: all models are incorrect, but some are useful. Right. Some are useful. If they weren’t useful, the price of many things which are manufactured by optimized computer controls would go up a bunch. I’ve seen very shitty test data used to commission control systems. I’ve seen chance unmeasured disturbances completely overwhelm signal. Modern conventional medicine, outside of emergency/trauma medicine is mostly a joke. Pharma studies are a joke in comparison to the standards I am required to follow in my job. Even lots of studies of natural products are not convincing to me. But vaccine “science” takes the cake. NO true placebo controls going back decades. Ascribing public health improvements to the various vx, which happened years before the vx, is a prime example. It is fraudulent and arguably criminal. But the cv19vx is the creme de la creme of garbage research and falsified results. I could have designed a proper test of vxd vs unvxd but it would have required at least 5 years of data. And it would have been very expensive. Back to the subject at hand...the purported AEs are a safety signal. Huge red flag. You cannot say that they were not the vx. And we cannot say that they were, 100%. Fine. But the cautionary principle requires that we have proper long term clean trial data for both vxd and unvxd. We don’t have good data, because we didn’t allow MDs such as FLCCC to use their clinical expertise in both early treatment and hospital protocols such as MATH+. It would have given us time to do proper testing and evaluation. What we have now is a disaster, one which swung an election and may end up destroying the Republic. And you are in favor of both the narrative and what came after.
And vaccinating into the teeth of a pandemic?
Doctors and public health officials have known for a long time not to do that.
And ignoring or suppressing signals in VAERS which stood out like the Eiffel Tower?
And hiding internal evidence that the material from the clotshots went throughout the body, but telling the public it stayed at the injection site?
And removing the control arm by injecting the control group before the trial period was over?
And lying about the number of deaths in the experimental arm?
And covering up from the public the technology which made the original virus artificially engineered?
And attempting to force people to get the EUA jabs (against the law and informed consent)?
And covering up or lying about alternative modalities which would have prevented the EUA?
And driving up the case rates by putting sick patients in nursing homes in five states, ignoring the offer by the sitting President of dedicated military hospital ships instead?
And giving medical advice, "If you have symptoms, stay at home until you can't breathe. Then come in and get a drug which was so damaging, a trial on its use against Ebola was terminated because it was safer to risk Ebola than to take the drug." And making that drug the "standard of care?"
And slandering and destroying the career of those clinicians, MDs and scientists, who tried to call attention to any of the above?
Any one of those would be disqualifying.
All at once they deserve mass executions.
Including all of the "social media" influencers and trolls sent to to overcome so-called "vaccine hesitancy" (which is a made-up term designed by the subhuman vermin behind this whole thing)