... and there is the problem... I'm not trying to insult you when I say you're either blind or wilfully ignorant. I assume you're blind, so let me try and open your eyes.
.
The paper in itself presents the data and concept very clearly. You can validate the data yourself. Now you realise that the data analysis strongly implies "negative efficacy" with the obvious implication that the vaxx does more harm than good. The light bulb moment occurs and you realise that the vaxx isn't "safe & effective" as all the politicians and bureaucrats have been saying.
.
Understand tthat an entire population has been whipped up into a state of fear about the most deadly virus in history (of course it isn't, but, that's another line of discussion). Now to save the population from this deadly virus the bureaucrats have called an experimental drug a "vaccine" and told the population that it is both "safe & effective" and that things go back to normal after they've taken it. The experimental drug fails to work as promised... how do politicians and bureaucrats admit this without causing civil unrest whereby they end up dangling on the end of a rope?
.
Can you see the political problem here? This isn't a vaxx vs anti-vaxx... even if it's being framed that way by the media. It's not even labor/ liberal/ green/ republican/ democrat/ Tory... it's bigger than all those.
.
The problem here is that the vaxx doesn't work and if used as promoted by the political class... It causes more harm than good. Openly admitting this "more harm than good" problem can cause even greater harms...
.
So howhow do we fix it?
