>>13970079I'm still waiting for your counter-argument then. Don't worry, I've got the rings warmed up for your mental gymnastics
>Random chanceWhat I find most hilarious about people of your thinking-style is your almost blind devotion and conviction in nothing but statistics. I blame the educational establishment. We have completely lost our ability to drill down to the basic science of why something happens and the moment it gets even a bit too hard, we just attribute it to 'chance'. So what is this 'chance' caused by? What is the pathophysiology of it? Are you going to handwave it away with quantum effects hmm?
>oh no, it's retardedThanks for writing my retort for me, you're not that bad after all. I'm not the original anon who quoted the 1% figure, but my point is this just shows how much of a meme disease this is.
Sure, the vaccine trials may have had a lot more people catch the disease, but the fact that it wasn't captured in a study WHICH RELIED ON SELF REPORTED SYMPTOMS means it was pretty much a memeflu for the rest of them.
Remind me again why we are going mad over this?
Remind me again why we are locking down the economy, destroying livelihoods, causing nigger famines (the UN warned of this) and male suicides (muh toxic masculinity) over this?
Remind me again why we are vaccinating FIVE YEAR OLDS over this?
Oh that's right. We need to save the boomer generation that was pretty much due to reach peak age around this point in time (yes, look at the age adjusted mortality rates and see for yourself).
