|
|
|
|
|
|
by even_639765
663 days ago
|
|
|
You moved the goalpost. First, you wanted evidence. So I gave you evidence. Now you say you can't evaluate evidence, even the evidence of the people who told you to social distance admitting, under oath, they don't know where that idea came from and they know of no evidence to support it. So why did you ask for evidence? |
|
|
Look, friend: I don't have infinite time to go digging into all the cites you provided. For all I know, you're doing the Steve Bannon "flood the zone with shit" trick — I don't know that you're doing that, but neither do I know that you aren't.
YOU say that these publications say various things. But I'd also asked you for evidence that you know what you're talking about and can be trusted to be honest. You didn't provide any such evidence, nor even your real name.
EDIT: I skimmed through your last cite about myo/pericardiotis, a meta-study in BMJ. Key phrase: "Thus, while the risk of myo/pericarditis is higher in the vaccinated group than in the unvaccinated group, the absolute risk of myo/pericarditis is small in both groups." (Emphasis mine.) That seems to be an important fact, but you don't seem to have picked up on it — either that or you're intentionally not mentioning it for your polemical purposes.
So forgive me if I take a pass on believing you.