I wouldn't put it that way. He and I have friends in common, and it is the common opinion that he is extremely smart. He is the sort of person that the intelligence community likes to deal with, and the Deep State likes to control if they can elevate him to a useful position.
But isn’t that the problem? Intelligence community likes to deal with…Deep State controls…useful position=useful idiot. Sometimes extremely smart looks through a narrow lens and blocks out useful information. This in itself is a bias, a bias of trust.
Useful position != useful idiot at some levels. I knew several members of Vivek's math team. Our schools competed at the same events, and we overlapped. What I've gleened is that he was ambitious, perfect grades, and thoroughly cutthroat (but adept at hiding it). He went to Harvard, and kept climbing the ladder since.
I have a biostats master's degree, which was extremely rigorous and difficult, basically doing calculus 8 hours a day for the first year, but I would argue that lack of math isn't truly the core problem. Academics often miss very simple things. In the first large project I worked on (as a graduate student), which was data from a computer-guided telephone survey of new breastfeeding mothers, the computer program contained an erroneous "skip" that caused the majority of women to skip past many of the vital questions to the end of the survey. Another student had worked on these data for 9 months (!!) and never noticed the immense amount of missing data.
Another project I worked on, there was a massive outlier in the data which completely changed the regression results depending on whether it was included or excluded. No one had simply plotted the data. It was a swarm of data points showing no trend but with one huge outlier driving the entirety of the slope estimate. There are statistics to identify outliers / high-leverage data points, but really, you just needed the simplest plot to see there was an issue.
Another project I worked on regarding mercury levels in dentists failed to control for mercury spills in the office, which was available data, but had been ignored. A mercury spill within the previous 6 months was a significant predictor of mercury levels and altered several models and conclusions once accounted for. No one had apparently read the entire survey and thought "Hey.... might this be a confounding variable?" Except me.
Speaking of confounding, ask just about anyone in academia what negative confounding is. They won't know. It's when there are two opposite trends which tend to co-occur. For instance, for one of my clients studying women in Kenya and their usage of professional midwives, having more money was a positive for hiring professional help, but having more children was a negative (because they were old hands at it by then). Well, women with more children tended to have more money, so the positive (money) and the negative (old hands at it by now) canceled each other out. Neither seemed related to the decision to hire a midwife, but that was incorrect. Both had to be taken into account *simultaneously* to see the true effects. Which is also true of healthy / wealthy / educated status and harms caused by vaccination; they are opposite effects on mortality, but they co-occur, so must be addressed simultaneously. It's negative confounding. Few in academia seems to grok this concept.
The stupid runs deep. But math isn't usually the problem in my opinion -- PhD statisticians adore mathematical models and want to outdo each other with the latest, most complex clustered-data time series multi-level sampling blah blah blah. Meanwhile nobody does effing scatter plots.
It's an inability to think with genuine curiosity, in my opinion, more often than it is a lack of rigorous math. I'm convinced academia now is deliberately churning out useful idiots because a system this complex and this corrupt needs a great, great many of them in order to run.
In most cases, I would agree with you. However, HUB is a phenomenon global to the entire vaccine industry. This is on a different plane than programming and coding problems. This is more like the ecological fallacy, but more ubiquitous within a single highly important domain. And the mandates seems so suspiciously sculpting (who decided that 70% was the right number for corporations?!) of the effect that it's hard to chalk this up to an "oopsie".
There were many aspects of the mandates that were also sculpted.
In the week that the big companies started demanding vax for their employees, including remote workers, all of the prior case law and summaries on civil rights and religious exemptions in the workplace disappeared from both current federal websites and the way back machine. What was also clear was the method for collecting exemption requests was a software program that some company wrote (who?) and was shared across all the big companies in the industries, because the questions were exactly the same at Intel and IBM and Cisco and.... It did not allow for text or letters or paragraphs to be put in, as one would expect. It flat out violated the law because it required questions answered related to sincerity of faith. But if you listened to the remote workers tasked with filling these out for employees requesting exemptions, It was clear it was a drop down menu/multiple choice system with logic designed to prevent people from being granted exemptions.
Again, everyone all at once decided knowledge worker employees that were working remotely from home had to be vax'd or be fired.
But to.freelearner's point, it's not math the useful idiots lack. It's honestly and an obsessive willingness to question the status quo that they lack. That is, a special kind of conscientiousness is required, one ruthless to one's ego, to do proper science research. Engineering does not require that. So it's possible to engineer outcomes with lots of ego centric liars to self. Engineering is easy to manipulate politically even while pretending it's pure pragmatism. But what was astonishing at first wasn't the people willing to impose this system on us, but the number of PhD level scientists who decided to junk every atom of training and rationality and take the experimental gene therapy themselves. The ability to manipulate fear trumped all. Math matters not.
I believe there was a paper that estimated vaccine dose fatality rates by age, and actually found (somewhat to general surprise, since we see so much about young athlete deaths) that the greatest danger for vaccine mortality was among the elderly. This would then mean that student mandates would bias the results exactly as you imply.
But of course, no one blinks when a 75 yo dies, even when he was healthy and fit the day before. And if you dare point out a noticeable uptick of say, 10 or 20%, for that age group, it's just *shrug* covid deaths or lock down deaths...
Yes, so evil! Kill them with Covid and separate them from loved ones, and if that doesn’t kill them, given them the poison prick. I have personally know a lot of older people who died, I thought, prematurely, with cases of blood clots in legs causing horrible pain and suffering, and a quick dementia too. Some of them had previously gotten through Covid with no problems!
I'll be honest my stats suck and I've long felt I should do something about that.
I have nothing more than high school level Calc and that was a long time ago and avoided math like the plague when doing my biology degree.
Another one of those stories of avoiding something you don't like and then later in life realizing you should have hit it head on and embraced the pain. I'd be better off now for sure.
Do you have a recommendation for how I might address my stats deficiency?
I checked out the above link and read all the posts on "Wiki Campfire" None of the videos were enabled (not just the first 2). Do I need to subscribe to something before I can see the videos? Please put me on the list to be notified when I can sign up for your statistics/biostatistics course. If it is already available, please let me know how to sign up.
No courses, yet. We are currently in stage one of reconfiguring a lot of old curriculum to publish to subscribers. After that, I plan to start organizing some classes, though I may not teach them myself.
Hmmm. The RTE YouTube channel was deleted. I thought these videos were on the MetaPrep channel. I may have to re-upload them. Sigh.
Ditto on what you said. I have learned more about the logic of math by reading books about math the last few years than I did in 3 semesters of calculus in college. Regret not diving in and hate that math education is so terrible.
I think you really are insightful about what we once called SES, socioeconomic status. I think, though, there are other factors with vaccine injury, or no injury. I just don't know what they are. Maybe the number of ace 2 receptors, the vitamin D level, the stress level--even rich people have differing biologies. But statistics are about the big picture, not the anomalies. Generally, rich people do better in all metrics of health, even with four vaccines that are beyond creepy.
The lot / batch number is a big random variable. You can see this at https://howbadismybatch.com/ and similar sites. My dad died from the Moderna vaccine in June 2021 and both his batches were very high in the list of "hot lots". He was a wealthy, healthy PhD, but bad lots are bad lots. Died of what I now think of as "the usual" -- multiple organ failure, no known cause. (Edited to add: He was 72.)
So far, nobody has shown me any data for the hot lots hypothesis that isn't consistent with demographics explanations. And every Statistician I've talked to has quickly agreed with me on that point. This story seems to have legs among people who need shock stories to tell.
If somebody has performed a correction on variables, I'd like to see it.
My dad got two lots that are within the first two pages, my mother got different lots listed way, way lower in the adverse event count and she has not had any issues. Regardless of the lots hypothesis, my dad was clearly killed by the vaccine, going drastically downhill following vaccination and dying about 8 weeks later; my mom is still here. That is my personal bias. It's not statistics, it's just personal feeling.
However, there is a history of "hot lots" in the vaccine industry and it's why they break up lots into very small units and scatter them across the country. They learned that after a bad batch that killed like 7-8 kids in one community in Tennessee. The industry appeared to believe in this because they changed their behavior.
When I looked into hot lots, I did not find any literature that was suggestive of it---just noisy data consistent with the almost certainty that demographics-per-batch vary highly. But I'd be happy to look at papers that show a history of hot lots.
"Hot lots" could simply be aggregated lipids resulting in duds as Maria covered, random variations due to genetic factors, or random variations due to purity thanks to the N1M psuedoU and G quadraplexes. There also could be issues with various production lines, that cause different types of contamination, and thus harm. But I have a feeling, with all the other factors that add variation to quality and what is produced (from vial to vial, rather than lot to lot), that it would likely look noisy, even if true. I'm personally agnostic on the topic either way. As much as I dislike it for a "this explains everything" type thought, accidental IV injection could easily muddy the waters as well
I don'thave a BA or BS in anything and the importance of what you are saying here came thru crystal clear and like roaring rolling thunder. I look forward to one day being trained by you in statistics and specifically and especially how to not be fooled by corporate manipulated biostatistics. May your course (when available) be REQUIRED for all claiming to be expert in biostatistics. All it takes is one generation of students without this kind of knowledge and we are all sunk.
“ It took only a few people to build the scaffolding of that grand illusion. The rest of the Big Picture was filled in by the imaginations of the audience.”
I listened to a teacher today explaining that things like chatgbt are great for education and that even ivy league schools aren't requiring students write essays for admission. "Educators" are celebrating that students don't have to show mastery of many basic skills in order to graduate and go to college. I suppose this is part of the reason manipulations like ignoring HUB, was so easy to pull off. The dumbing down of Americans, slowly then suddenly by polluting the education system with "progressivism", erasing critical thinking and basic educational competencies (reading, writing, science and math). We are a a growing society of mushy brains that can agree to lies such as boys can become girls, masks save lives and you'll kill Grandma if you don't get this shot. It seems bad now but Orwell's 1984 and Huxley's Brave New World may be our reality very soon.
I wish I'd benefited from HUB (which I understand to mean the false attribution of benefit to the intervention taken by healthy people that actually occurs equally to matched cohort of healthy people who didn't take the intervention but are never counted) back when I was a supposedly healthy twenty-something athletic sugar-avoiding non-drinking low-fat vegetarian, conscientiously getting 7.5 hours of sleep each night and taking doctor-recommended annual flu shots to try to avoid frequent bouts of bronchitis and pneumonia that had plagued me from early childhood. Flu shots were definitely not protective. Every year I was felled by at least two nasty ILIs and missed weeks of work, bedridden. In fact the first bad one usually happened within ten days after the October flu shot. I don't know why I wasn't suspicious about efficacy sooner. Took me a decade to stop following bad medical advice about 'healthy' diet and flu shots and start taking D3. I wonder if HUB would disappear if researchers would count ILIs that occur within the two-week post-jab period, that are not recorded as the adverse effect of immediate post-jab immunosuppression.
If I present this to a person with average understanding, including having been subject to massive propaganda over the last few years, I *expect* to get the response that the early vax rollout seemed to correlate with a decline in cases and hospitalizations, which presumably wouldn't involve the HUB, because older and sicker people were prioritized for access to this health-protecting treatment. I imagine you have a response, and I'd be very interested in hearing it.
OK, anyone? What do you say to a person who, understandably, is under the impression that early in the rollout, cases declined *as a result* of vaccination?
Was this documentably due to a simultaneous shift in the standard cycle threshold for PCR tests? Was it because, coincidentally, the most vulnerable had already gotten sick and many of them had died? Was the reporting of declining cases corrupt in some other way?
I have to disagree with this. I think that you are missing an important point. Many of those too sick to take vaccines are not poor or uneducated--they are likely in hospice or otherwise too sick to be injected. The Death's Door Bias isn't quite the same as the HUB, but the DDB likely plays a huge role in unvaccinated mortality.
No, but I'd be happy to talk with him. I saw some of what he was talking about, but only superficially. It's hard to dig into all avenues at once with confidence.
Our current Surgeon General is another diversity hire. It’s apparent any time he opens his mouth. 🤦♀️
I wouldn't put it that way. He and I have friends in common, and it is the common opinion that he is extremely smart. He is the sort of person that the intelligence community likes to deal with, and the Deep State likes to control if they can elevate him to a useful position.
But isn’t that the problem? Intelligence community likes to deal with…Deep State controls…useful position=useful idiot. Sometimes extremely smart looks through a narrow lens and blocks out useful information. This in itself is a bias, a bias of trust.
Or I’m missing the whole point.
Useful position != useful idiot at some levels. I knew several members of Vivek's math team. Our schools competed at the same events, and we overlapped. What I've gleened is that he was ambitious, perfect grades, and thoroughly cutthroat (but adept at hiding it). He went to Harvard, and kept climbing the ladder since.
That’s nothing compared to this guy who is now 2nd in command at CDC
https://www.themainewire.com/2023/02/the-truth-about-nirav-shah-the-maine-media-never-told-you/
I have a biostats master's degree, which was extremely rigorous and difficult, basically doing calculus 8 hours a day for the first year, but I would argue that lack of math isn't truly the core problem. Academics often miss very simple things. In the first large project I worked on (as a graduate student), which was data from a computer-guided telephone survey of new breastfeeding mothers, the computer program contained an erroneous "skip" that caused the majority of women to skip past many of the vital questions to the end of the survey. Another student had worked on these data for 9 months (!!) and never noticed the immense amount of missing data.
Another project I worked on, there was a massive outlier in the data which completely changed the regression results depending on whether it was included or excluded. No one had simply plotted the data. It was a swarm of data points showing no trend but with one huge outlier driving the entirety of the slope estimate. There are statistics to identify outliers / high-leverage data points, but really, you just needed the simplest plot to see there was an issue.
Another project I worked on regarding mercury levels in dentists failed to control for mercury spills in the office, which was available data, but had been ignored. A mercury spill within the previous 6 months was a significant predictor of mercury levels and altered several models and conclusions once accounted for. No one had apparently read the entire survey and thought "Hey.... might this be a confounding variable?" Except me.
Speaking of confounding, ask just about anyone in academia what negative confounding is. They won't know. It's when there are two opposite trends which tend to co-occur. For instance, for one of my clients studying women in Kenya and their usage of professional midwives, having more money was a positive for hiring professional help, but having more children was a negative (because they were old hands at it by then). Well, women with more children tended to have more money, so the positive (money) and the negative (old hands at it by now) canceled each other out. Neither seemed related to the decision to hire a midwife, but that was incorrect. Both had to be taken into account *simultaneously* to see the true effects. Which is also true of healthy / wealthy / educated status and harms caused by vaccination; they are opposite effects on mortality, but they co-occur, so must be addressed simultaneously. It's negative confounding. Few in academia seems to grok this concept.
The stupid runs deep. But math isn't usually the problem in my opinion -- PhD statisticians adore mathematical models and want to outdo each other with the latest, most complex clustered-data time series multi-level sampling blah blah blah. Meanwhile nobody does effing scatter plots.
It's an inability to think with genuine curiosity, in my opinion, more often than it is a lack of rigorous math. I'm convinced academia now is deliberately churning out useful idiots because a system this complex and this corrupt needs a great, great many of them in order to run.
In most cases, I would agree with you. However, HUB is a phenomenon global to the entire vaccine industry. This is on a different plane than programming and coding problems. This is more like the ecological fallacy, but more ubiquitous within a single highly important domain. And the mandates seems so suspiciously sculpting (who decided that 70% was the right number for corporations?!) of the effect that it's hard to chalk this up to an "oopsie".
There were many aspects of the mandates that were also sculpted.
In the week that the big companies started demanding vax for their employees, including remote workers, all of the prior case law and summaries on civil rights and religious exemptions in the workplace disappeared from both current federal websites and the way back machine. What was also clear was the method for collecting exemption requests was a software program that some company wrote (who?) and was shared across all the big companies in the industries, because the questions were exactly the same at Intel and IBM and Cisco and.... It did not allow for text or letters or paragraphs to be put in, as one would expect. It flat out violated the law because it required questions answered related to sincerity of faith. But if you listened to the remote workers tasked with filling these out for employees requesting exemptions, It was clear it was a drop down menu/multiple choice system with logic designed to prevent people from being granted exemptions.
Again, everyone all at once decided knowledge worker employees that were working remotely from home had to be vax'd or be fired.
But to.freelearner's point, it's not math the useful idiots lack. It's honestly and an obsessive willingness to question the status quo that they lack. That is, a special kind of conscientiousness is required, one ruthless to one's ego, to do proper science research. Engineering does not require that. So it's possible to engineer outcomes with lots of ego centric liars to self. Engineering is easy to manipulate politically even while pretending it's pure pragmatism. But what was astonishing at first wasn't the people willing to impose this system on us, but the number of PhD level scientists who decided to junk every atom of training and rationality and take the experimental gene therapy themselves. The ability to manipulate fear trumped all. Math matters not.
I believe there was a paper that estimated vaccine dose fatality rates by age, and actually found (somewhat to general surprise, since we see so much about young athlete deaths) that the greatest danger for vaccine mortality was among the elderly. This would then mean that student mandates would bias the results exactly as you imply.
I believe it was this analysis I'm thinking of: https://correlation-canada.org/report-age-stratified-covid-19-vaccine-dose-fatality-rate-for-israel-and-australia/
Exactly. The curve is highly similar to the mortality risk curve for COVID-19, though slightly less steep.
But of course, no one blinks when a 75 yo dies, even when he was healthy and fit the day before. And if you dare point out a noticeable uptick of say, 10 or 20%, for that age group, it's just *shrug* covid deaths or lock down deaths...
Yes, so evil! Kill them with Covid and separate them from loved ones, and if that doesn’t kill them, given them the poison prick. I have personally know a lot of older people who died, I thought, prematurely, with cases of blood clots in legs causing horrible pain and suffering, and a quick dementia too. Some of them had previously gotten through Covid with no problems!
Those absorbed by the system have to hate the skeptics, otherwise they would have to hate themselves.
Thanks Mathew, love your work.
I'll be honest my stats suck and I've long felt I should do something about that.
I have nothing more than high school level Calc and that was a long time ago and avoided math like the plague when doing my biology degree.
Another one of those stories of avoiding something you don't like and then later in life realizing you should have hit it head on and embraced the pain. I'd be better off now for sure.
Do you have a recommendation for how I might address my stats deficiency?
Anyone who wants to learn needs to dedicate the time, starting at the foundation.
https://metaprepeducation.locals.com/post/3712107/counting-methods-form-the-foundation-of-probability-and-statistics-training
I checked out the above link and read all the posts on "Wiki Campfire" None of the videos were enabled (not just the first 2). Do I need to subscribe to something before I can see the videos? Please put me on the list to be notified when I can sign up for your statistics/biostatistics course. If it is already available, please let me know how to sign up.
No courses, yet. We are currently in stage one of reconfiguring a lot of old curriculum to publish to subscribers. After that, I plan to start organizing some classes, though I may not teach them myself.
Hmmm. The RTE YouTube channel was deleted. I thought these videos were on the MetaPrep channel. I may have to re-upload them. Sigh.
Ditto on what you said. I have learned more about the logic of math by reading books about math the last few years than I did in 3 semesters of calculus in college. Regret not diving in and hate that math education is so terrible.
I think you really are insightful about what we once called SES, socioeconomic status. I think, though, there are other factors with vaccine injury, or no injury. I just don't know what they are. Maybe the number of ace 2 receptors, the vitamin D level, the stress level--even rich people have differing biologies. But statistics are about the big picture, not the anomalies. Generally, rich people do better in all metrics of health, even with four vaccines that are beyond creepy.
The lot / batch number is a big random variable. You can see this at https://howbadismybatch.com/ and similar sites. My dad died from the Moderna vaccine in June 2021 and both his batches were very high in the list of "hot lots". He was a wealthy, healthy PhD, but bad lots are bad lots. Died of what I now think of as "the usual" -- multiple organ failure, no known cause. (Edited to add: He was 72.)
So far, nobody has shown me any data for the hot lots hypothesis that isn't consistent with demographics explanations. And every Statistician I've talked to has quickly agreed with me on that point. This story seems to have legs among people who need shock stories to tell.
If somebody has performed a correction on variables, I'd like to see it.
My dad got two lots that are within the first two pages, my mother got different lots listed way, way lower in the adverse event count and she has not had any issues. Regardless of the lots hypothesis, my dad was clearly killed by the vaccine, going drastically downhill following vaccination and dying about 8 weeks later; my mom is still here. That is my personal bias. It's not statistics, it's just personal feeling.
However, there is a history of "hot lots" in the vaccine industry and it's why they break up lots into very small units and scatter them across the country. They learned that after a bad batch that killed like 7-8 kids in one community in Tennessee. The industry appeared to believe in this because they changed their behavior.
I'm very sorry to hear about your father.
When I looked into hot lots, I did not find any literature that was suggestive of it---just noisy data consistent with the almost certainty that demographics-per-batch vary highly. But I'd be happy to look at papers that show a history of hot lots.
While this is not about covid vaccines, it is a proof of concept: Evidence of the Tennessee SIDS cluster / scattering of lots: https://www.sott.net/article/396436-The-Tennessee-Sudden-Infant-Death-Syndrome-cluster-How-Wyeth-concealed-the-DPT-vaccine-SIDS-link
"Hot lots" could simply be aggregated lipids resulting in duds as Maria covered, random variations due to genetic factors, or random variations due to purity thanks to the N1M psuedoU and G quadraplexes. There also could be issues with various production lines, that cause different types of contamination, and thus harm. But I have a feeling, with all the other factors that add variation to quality and what is produced (from vial to vial, rather than lot to lot), that it would likely look noisy, even if true. I'm personally agnostic on the topic either way. As much as I dislike it for a "this explains everything" type thought, accidental IV injection could easily muddy the waters as well
Very impressive article. Biases and personal greed tends to miss a lot when it comes to ‘the science.’
This is such an excellent important article!
I don'thave a BA or BS in anything and the importance of what you are saying here came thru crystal clear and like roaring rolling thunder. I look forward to one day being trained by you in statistics and specifically and especially how to not be fooled by corporate manipulated biostatistics. May your course (when available) be REQUIRED for all claiming to be expert in biostatistics. All it takes is one generation of students without this kind of knowledge and we are all sunk.
“ It took only a few people to build the scaffolding of that grand illusion. The rest of the Big Picture was filled in by the imaginations of the audience.”
Sounds like the moon landing.
I listened to a teacher today explaining that things like chatgbt are great for education and that even ivy league schools aren't requiring students write essays for admission. "Educators" are celebrating that students don't have to show mastery of many basic skills in order to graduate and go to college. I suppose this is part of the reason manipulations like ignoring HUB, was so easy to pull off. The dumbing down of Americans, slowly then suddenly by polluting the education system with "progressivism", erasing critical thinking and basic educational competencies (reading, writing, science and math). We are a a growing society of mushy brains that can agree to lies such as boys can become girls, masks save lives and you'll kill Grandma if you don't get this shot. It seems bad now but Orwell's 1984 and Huxley's Brave New World may be our reality very soon.
Mathew, thank you for your material. I continue to learn invaluable information from you. Much respect to you.
Could I trouble you to define an acronym on its initial usage. That would be very helpful for me.
I wish I'd benefited from HUB (which I understand to mean the false attribution of benefit to the intervention taken by healthy people that actually occurs equally to matched cohort of healthy people who didn't take the intervention but are never counted) back when I was a supposedly healthy twenty-something athletic sugar-avoiding non-drinking low-fat vegetarian, conscientiously getting 7.5 hours of sleep each night and taking doctor-recommended annual flu shots to try to avoid frequent bouts of bronchitis and pneumonia that had plagued me from early childhood. Flu shots were definitely not protective. Every year I was felled by at least two nasty ILIs and missed weeks of work, bedridden. In fact the first bad one usually happened within ten days after the October flu shot. I don't know why I wasn't suspicious about efficacy sooner. Took me a decade to stop following bad medical advice about 'healthy' diet and flu shots and start taking D3. I wonder if HUB would disappear if researchers would count ILIs that occur within the two-week post-jab period, that are not recorded as the adverse effect of immediate post-jab immunosuppression.
HUB plus 2week period after shots covers 60-90% of it.
Add in differential practices around testing , erroneous determinations of vaccine status and you are likely at95%
If I present this to a person with average understanding, including having been subject to massive propaganda over the last few years, I *expect* to get the response that the early vax rollout seemed to correlate with a decline in cases and hospitalizations, which presumably wouldn't involve the HUB, because older and sicker people were prioritized for access to this health-protecting treatment. I imagine you have a response, and I'd be very interested in hearing it.
OK, anyone? What do you say to a person who, understandably, is under the impression that early in the rollout, cases declined *as a result* of vaccination?
Was this documentably due to a simultaneous shift in the standard cycle threshold for PCR tests? Was it because, coincidentally, the most vulnerable had already gotten sick and many of them had died? Was the reporting of declining cases corrupt in some other way?
The Bigger Picture...
You are right in one thing... people miss the bigger picture... and this includes you.
People like Robert Malone & Steven Kirsch are puppets of the puppet masters and hold back Humanity by focusing on Covid, Vax and shit like that.
I am the only one that has warned people about the dangers of NEURAL LACE BCI inside the shit shots.
You and all the others dismissed me and ignored my warnings.
For all others here is a reminder.
https://fritzfreud.substack.com/p/klaus-schwab-darpa-harvard-elon-musk
And here
https://fritzfreud.substack.com/p/starlink-and-the-technomages
Now they are Transhumanists.
They want to connect Humanity to AI via BCI supplied through fake Vaxxination and lies.
You and all others dismissed me and Ignored me.
So I got a message for all of you.
I was right and you are wrong.
STARLINK is the central piece of their Empire.
But NEURAL LACE BCI has just advanced to such a point that your own personal nightmare is just around the corner.
https://www.inceptivemind.com/new-graphene-sensor-make-mind-control-robots-reality/30039/
Mind controlled Robots via NEURAL LACE BCI.
Thank you for nothing.
You are a disappointment to me.
Your greed & sucking up to the Wall street Fascists demonstrates your incapability to think for yourself.
I warned everyone.
I don't care anymore.
"This is why the HUB = WUB = EUB."
I have to disagree with this. I think that you are missing an important point. Many of those too sick to take vaccines are not poor or uneducated--they are likely in hospice or otherwise too sick to be injected. The Death's Door Bias isn't quite the same as the HUB, but the DDB likely plays a huge role in unvaccinated mortality.
No, but I'd be happy to talk with him. I saw some of what he was talking about, but only superficially. It's hard to dig into all avenues at once with confidence.