Flu Vaccine Not Working Well; Only 23 Percent Effective

Depending on the age group the CDC estimates are as little as 14%.  However I've already explained the problem with these estimates. 

Nope.  Never said you had to trust me.

A rose by any other name, is but a rose.

I do and I've provided some.

 

Nothing unbiased has emanated from that vessel.

However apparently this is not sufficient for you.

 

Nothing plus nothing is still nothing...well, in earth based reality anyway.

So I need to clarify some things about your position....but that would require you participating.

A reader offered that 'Cap almost never addresses shills and trolls directly - and uses a mirror when gazing upon them'...except for when he is referring to himself in the 3rd person(a crowd favorite I might add).

Again I really appreciate all this evidence that you are not at all interested in talking.

Op...did anyone see that ?...he just placed the burden of proof back on to Cap !!!

That wood be the same 'burden of proof' which he acknowledged and accepted in an above post quoted below...

Cap:  mimiking shill in mocking fashion:  "never mind that I don't have and evidence that its safe or effective."

Shill's terse reply:  ''' I do and I've provided some.  However apparently this is not sufficient for you.'''


So now we have a real live mystery on our hands...right here on overunity.com, I said, right here on overunity.com.

Who's the dirty scoundrel that absconded with one of our Shill's evidentiary post ?

I may have to consult my personal friend, world famous psychic Clara Voyant, in order to get to the bottom of this.

Now, this may not have been done maliciously, it may simply have been one of the readers pranking our erstwhile shill.

There may also be a freedom of speech issue involved...I will leave that to the shill to address, as he wood be the alleged victim.

I have a feeling he will gracefully overlook the incident...as we all know how loosey goosey he is in with everybody else's intellectual property.

Lets hope all's swell that ends swell.

Regards...

Nope. 

Well, i guess that clears up that mud.

I don't know about the rest of you, but the word of an evasive shill is good enough for me.

Vaccines is good !

Do they have a DIY vaccination kit for sale...I wooden trust people who stick needles in other people to do it ?

Regards...

I am, and have been a Moderator in certain areas of this forum for over 6 years now.

Bill

Here is my post Joel as I know that you have real problems with research.

How the hell do you get 30 years out my saying 6 years?

Is this some sort of overunity?  A new type of QEG perhaps?

Bill

I've not asked you to take my word.  I've just pointed out that:

Word twisting or yet another honest misunderstanding of meaning...you be the judge.

i) I've accepted your request to take on the burden of proof.

Op...now he's back on the horse again...this is like playing 'Where's Waldo'.

ii) Evidence has been presented - you agree

Word twisting or yet another honest misunderstanding of meaning...you be the judge.

iii) You do not consider the evidence sufficient to support the claim that - vaccines are safe and effective - you agree

Word twisting or yet another honest misunderstanding of meaning...you be the judge.

iv) In order to meet your standard of evidence I have to be able to determine what it is...

Op...and now he as much as says he hasn't presented evidence...a little Freudian action going on there.

This is like playing Beatles songs backward, and hearing John say 'I buried Paul'.

v) You obviously don't want that.

And oddly enough, the Beatles recorded 'You Can't do That'...which contrastingly actually had some meaning and relevance to something.

Tell you what I'm going to put you back in the box.

I think the readers pretty  knew who was in a box long before now.

Whenever you want to call my bluff, just let me know that you're willing to answer questions.  Okay?  Great.

And...back to me again.

I guess if your head is spinning all the time, you almost adjust to it, and think nobody notices the dysfunctional behavior.

Regards...

Please provide a cite.

Un-published study results may never be cited
although it is possible to make mention of them
with certain limitations.

Any study result which would raise questions or
criticisms of current vaccination policy (90%
manpower requirement) are never officially
acknowledged.  Only those studies which
demonstrate an efficacy of approximately 25%
(for flu) are made available to the public and the
rank and file military members.

Government contracts for military vaccinations are
lucrative business.  A certain percentage of the vaccines
are experimental which makes the military members
equivalent to 'guinea pigs.'

Refusal to 'take' a required military vaccination is an
offense punishable under the UCMJ.

I am telling you that IGNORE is a wonderful feature.

Especially with the ego concussions I gave the forum's self appointed arse kisser.

Last time I checked, 32 people have Crap-Z-ro on ignore.


Bill

Well, I have been here doing the spade work for what...30 years now, I believe.

And Yeah, I may have snapped a troll spine or 3 along the way...but I may be over selling myself here...who knows how many of them were simply multiple moniker trolls.

And of course, browned off the self appointed and incredibly stupid arse kisser to the shills and trolls.

Everyone has seen too many members leave or be hounded by those very same naysayers nitpickers and trouble makers that end up whining after taking runs at me...my, what another coincidence.

Regards...

Within the military establishment there exists a body of research knowledge which is 'classified'
and made available only to those within the compartmentalized environment with a 'need to know.' 

In other words there is a very low degree of transparency and therefore it is less reliable than non-military research.

The research data relating to vaccines and vaccinations is more extensive than you might possibly imagine.

We're talking about efficacy (and potentially safety) data.  The reason you think this is so easy is because you don't understand how research is done.  It's not your fault.  You probably don't have much more than high-school math and all you appear to do is read the absolutely lowest quality information written by some of the most ignorant people imaginable. Ok, that last part is your fault but being unable to differentiate is probably the fault of however you were educated.

The truth is the military can do all the studies it wants, it can spend it's entire budget and all the shadow budgets you can imagine and employ every enlisted, reserve and start kidnapping civilians at random and...would still be unable to get a significantly different result.  See there is, to anyone who took even an introduction to statistics - a law of diminishing returns when it comes to research.

There is much deception in all that is fed to the public.

There is, but the vast majority comes from websites like the ones you post...and people like yourself. Again when it comes to efficacy you can believe that the military spends all it's time inoculating people then exposing them to a disease.  However it's not likely that they will get a different result.

You are either aware of this and are engaging in purposeful deception or you are one of the deceived 'useful idiots.'

This is what logicians call a false dichotomy.  You are stating there are two possibilities when there are more than two.  For example one other possibility is that you are simply mistaken...another is that you're deluded.