Richard Sharpe on Unreported Truths

[Richard Sharpe]

Alex, it is worse than that. A recent paper suggests that the IFR for the virus is much lower than was claimed: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.10.11.22280963v1

At 60-69 they claim 0.501% so 70 and over was 1% or maybe a bit higher.

Now, as the Pfizer scientists admitted in Australia, every vaccine has side effects. The question is does the benefit outweigh the risk.

The CDC is advising people that they should get the modRNA gene therapy every year, perhaps twice a year.

The risk is additive.

So, a baby at 6 months old is advised to get at least 70 of those shots by the time they are 70, perhaps even 140. If we go with the 10-20% risk of a serious side effect per shot (from one of your previous posts) and be generous by assuming only a 10% risk of a serious side effect, the probability of a serious side effect by age 70 is: 1 - (0.9)^70.

That is: 0.99937.

You are ensuring a child will have a serious side effect in order to reduce their risk of dying from Covid-19 at age 70?

And, let's not forget that the modRNA Gene therapy wears off quickly.

It's amusing to also calculate when they should wait until to get the modRNA Gene Therapy.

If they wait until age 35, the probability of a serious side effect drops to 0.99127. Such a huge reduction in risk.

If they wait until age 30 the probability of a serious side effect drops to 0.957.

If they wait until age 50 the probability of a serious side effect drops to 0.878.

Of course, if the actual risk of a serious side effect is larger than 10% then it is even worse.

I think I will wait until I am dead ... ha ha ha.

Hmmm, someone who is more familiar with statistics claims that it is not that simple ... so I would like to see a better argument.