Thread 514889305

>>514889305 (OP)
>vaxbros

who are you talking to? anyone vaxxed died a long time ago

The failure of the red deer to materialize permanently buckbroke the antivax schizos' minds. These people were fully convinced that the vaccines would kill everyone in two weeks and all their problems would go away. They were even fantasizing about how their "pureblood seed" was going to be worth millions of dollars and women would suddenly have a reason to have sex with them (LOL!). As time went on and it became more obvious that nothing was going to happen, these people became increasingly unhinged, eating dangerous agricultural chemicals to treat a virus they didn't even believe existed, just because a scientist told them not to.

Now that it's obvious the end result of the vaccines wasn't a mass die off and the consequent loss of their virginity, but rather an end to the pandemic and their becoming even more socially isolated than before, it has become impossible for them to reconcile what they need to believe with the undeniable reality, and so now, 5 whole years after the pandemic, they are still utterly mind broken and have not progressed mentally since 2020. They continue to go on about how it's only 10 more years, spike proteins this and prions that, obsessively scouring the internet for the latest news of an 87 year old dying to blame on the jab.

Ironically, or perhaps appropriately, the antivaxxers are the only ones still experiencing the effects of the COVID pandemic. Everyone else has moved on. They are completely alone.

>>514889305 (OP)
>he's still underlining things
i bet the government don't even pay him anymore

>>514889338
trump is still alive thoughever

>>514889305 (OP)
>The rate of first hospitalization for cancer of any site
>Unvaccinated group: 0.85%
>Vaccinated group (one or more doses): 1.15%

>COVID-19 vaccination, all-cause mortality, and hospitalization for cancer: 30-month cohort study in an Italian province
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40881928/

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12381369/

https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/breaking-first-population-wide-study

>>514889338
>>514889345
The bots are fast today.

>>514889305 (OP)
>0.30% difference
>no mention of error rate

>>514889486
It has two underlines chud

>>514889345
VPN bot, same cut n paste post word for word. Red deer was a psyop for any blow back.

>>514889447
They used the typical methods of normalization, even went beyond that. But I don't think normalization can make these two groups identical to the point of making CI: 1.11-1.37 reliable, see picrel, double the prior cancer patients vaxed vs unvaxed, 50% more for most other major diseases. But it's good that someone tries at a higher level than posting an excel that is barely past per capita, it's absolutely impossible that vaccines don't have heavy side effects.

>>514890295
Interesting. Do you have a link for the pic?

>>514889305 (OP)
Weird how throwing a bunch of random shit in your body that self-replicates and hijacks your cells to produce spikes that your body isn't used to (not a virus) eventually causes cancer.

>>514890295
I haven't seen any definitive stat who got vaxed, this is the first time I see something like this, and the effect size is very surprising. Apparently, those who were hit by the wrong photon got vaccinated fearing for their lives, those without the experience that bad things happen did not. This explains the online rhetoric quite well.

>>514890404
https://escollection.es

>>514890404
>>514890602
oh sorry, wrong link
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12381369/#sec7
my bad

>>514889305 (OP)
Could be because more younger and healthy people chose not to get vaxxed. Cancer risk increases as you age.

>>514890602
>>514890659
KEK. Nice one. Thanks

>>514889305 (OP)
>.3% difference
I'm unvaxxed, but wouldn't this be explained by the age gap in the vaxxed vs unvaxxed groups?
Let me know when the difference hits 10%

>>514889305 (OP)
https://youtu.be/UovEeOZI8Vc?

>>514889305 (OP)
Surely there will be refunds?

>>514889345
35% higher hospitalization risk for cancer is huge but it is not a biblical rapture.

The government convincing vaxxies to ostracize us over not increasing our health risk just shows how cucked the general population is.

>>514889305 (OP)
It's 2025. Vaccination was in 2021.
It's old data, right?

>>514889389
good

>>514890978
Adjust for age, and I think you've found the cause of the discrepancy. A lot of people under 40 chose not to get vaxxed, as opposed to almost all boomers who did get vaxxed. Cancer rate increases with age.

>>514890978
>but it is not a biblical rapture
It is here, there are not enough cancer treatments for everyone.

>>514889305 (OP)
is it corrected for age ?

>>514891083
>>514891436

>>514891236
There is giant rise in young people getting cancers, even mainstream publications admit it, they just can't figure out why you see...

https://www.cancer.gov/news-events/cancer-currents-blog/2025/early-onset-cancer-research-environment-genetics-support

>>514889305 (OP)
he makes a living from pretending the vax will kill us all. its his job now.

13bn vaccinations were administered. 6bn people were at least double vaxed
if 0.1% of people Double vaxxed experienced serious side effects that would be 6million people. thats the population of Serbia or Nicaragua or Bulgaria.

The risk of serious side effects from the vax is statistically negligible. A cup of Coffee carries more risk

>>514891790
>we prepared a poison, t.

We tried to warn them
They thought we were schizo
2025 is here
Now they have lumps and defunked jizzo.

>>514889345
THERE HE IS! LOL.

>44 seconds this time
They fixed the bot i see.

>>514891660
To be fair they were planning this for a long time, so theres a lot of paperwork to go through.

>>514891790
>pretending the vax will kill us all
uh...no...he doesn't...he doesn't even has to pretend.
>The risk of serious side effects from the vax is statistically negligible. A cup of Coffee carries more risk

ah ok, you're just a disinfo bot, and not a very good one at that.

>>514891790
Oh so 6 million is an insignificant number...interesting.

Why are these threads so disingenuous and lacking all forms of actual information.
Risk of cancer hospitalization? What even is that measure? What is the actual cancer rate by age group and organ?
Each organ has cancer risks but their mechanisms and rates vary wildly.
Is it lung cancer? How many were smokers?
Is it breast cancer?
What is it??? Cancer doesn't mean shit.
The vaccine was also supposed to give clots, then endocarditis, then turbo cancer, then impotence, then infertility, no we're going back to regular cancer? Which is it???
Even though the first replies are bots, they do tell the truth this is just a schizo larping as a survivor.

>>514892998
...."if" "if 0.1%"
my point was that you people don't seem to be able to understand big numbers, risk or plausibility.
only boomer American MAGAshits on Facebook had bad reactions to the vax. the rest of the world was fine

correlation does not equal causation, and i dont even know if that percent difference for that sample size is statistically significant

>>514889367
That's because he is underlining the wrong things.

>>514891662
Yes, but it is still more common for older people to get cancer. Look at the table posted earlier in this thread: >>514890295

It's obvious looking at vaccinated vs non statistics. The vaccinated group is older and has more comorbidities across the board.

The effect is absolutely as expected and shows nothing about the vaccine itself being a detriment.

>>514889305 (OP)
bad Youtube science. you have to compare similar cohorts. Older people are more likely to be vaccinated than younger and to no surprise the older you are the more cancers and other diseases occur.

>>514894731
>>514894812
They took the same region, and tried to normalize. But the groups are very different. And as Rajhid >>514893703 pointed out, cancer hospitalization is a measure of several factors, 2020s mass chudification amongst them. And they didn't normalize for smoking, because they don't have that data. Anyways, if all that disease incidence data was open source, as in high-k anonymity, we could easily force the medical industry into the 21st century, save millions of lives. But unfortunately, this data is CAREFULLY MANAGED. If aerospace would have quality management like the medical industry, there would be an airliner disaster every minute.

>>514891236
Didn’t read the study, but any good study would adjust for age.

>>514889305 (OP)
glad covid grandpa is still grifting. we're all going to die in 2 more weeks.

>>514889486
It says p<0.001 on the piece of paper right below this.
But you can calculate for yourself.
296015 people
16.6% unvaxxed = 49137 people
83.3% vaxxed = 246878 people
unvaxxed pozzed rate = 0.85%
vaxxed pozzed rate = 1.15%
p-value < 0.00001

So that's a 35% increased chance of cancer in vaxxed populations.

>>514889305 (OP)
https://rumble.com/v681rta-dr.-david-martin-the-who-was-founded-by-the-cartel-as-a-criminal-organizati.html
vast conspiracy

>>514896654
Ah but the age difference between the vaxxed and unvaxxed groups is not accounted for. The vaxxed group is on average older which on average means more cancer. Seems to explain the entire gap.

>>514897549
It is accounted for, they adjusted after that, but you can't just normalize away double the prior cancer incidence, that's probably deep in nonlinear territory, and they only used higher order correction for age.

>>514889345
I know this is a copypasta but it really is sad how obsessed they are with proving the vaccine causes turbo AIDS that they're latching onto stuff like this.
Scott Adams is an excellent example of this, since he probably wants to believe his own cancer is the vaccine's fault and not his lifestyle or his own bad genetics.

>>514889345
Imagine still bragging about taking the kikevaxx even now
Amazing ignorance on display
Enjoy your early death
I'm sure it was worth it

>>514894139
>I SAID IF
But you don't know the real numbers, so STFU

>>514889447
>Unvaccinated group: 0.85%
>Vaccinated group (one or more doses): 1.15%
math enthusiast here:
>42.75%
>57.25%

>>514889305 (OP)
That grandpa has over 3 million subscribers. He's made millions of dollars by solely fear mongering the cattle on the toobz. Think about that.

>>514889345
You are like the rat that doesn't realize how slowly the poison kills but in the end all of vaxtards will die prematurely.

>>514889305 (OP)
Of course it gives you cancer as an added bonus, ((they)) did not want you dead, but sick
There is very little money in death, there is a lot in "curing" sickness

>>514889305 (OP)
So there is a 0.3% increased chance of getting cancer? So literally nothing.

>>514889447
They also concluded that all cause mortality was decreased in the vaxed group.

>>514897814
Oh you're right it is adjusted for age... that's concerning

>>514889305 (OP)
>0.85--->1.15%
or older, less healthier people were more inclined to get jabbed.

>>514899070
One clean needle has been deposited to your vaxie account.

>>514899070
Its actually about a 35% increase. So if you go to a 4 bed cancer ward at least one of them is there just because of the vaxx

>>514898537
I can guarantee if they demonetized him he'd keep going

>>514901485
That's very naive of you. This grandpa is a kike.

>>514902177
Yeah probably, he's s nurse. But even his NHS pension will be more than enough to live on