# Statistics experiment results

As I requested last weekend people gave me some numbers regarding how many people they knew in the following categories:

1. Had a reaction to a mRNA “vaccine” which resulted in an ER visit and/or hospitalization.
2. Had a reaction to a mRNA “vaccine” which resulted in long term (two or more months) adverse effects.
3. Had a reaction to a mRNA “vaccine” which resulted in death.
4. Had COVID-19 which which resulted in an ER visit and/or hospitalization.
5. Had COVID-19 which resulted in long term (two or more months) adverse effects.
6. Had COVID-19 which resulted in death.

The raw numbers and simple statistics are:

 Question 1 2 3 4 5 6 Vaccine COVID-19 ER/Hosp | Long Term | Death | ER/Hosp | Long Term | Death 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 60 0 4 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 5 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 Total 71 14 7 17 16 16 Mean 2.54 0.50 0.25 0.61 0.57 0.57 Std Dev 11.29 1.11 0.84 0.74 0.84 0.74

We have an outlier in row 9. A 60 when the mean is 2.54 (including the outlier!). This is nearly 5.1 standard deviations above the mean. If this sample were part of the same population as the rest of the samples the odds of that happening by chance are about 1 in 5.6 million. I considered keeping this row anyway and ascribe the greater numbers to a much greater set of people known. But the ratios are nowhere close to another other samples. So, for the following discussion I’m going exclude that row. You can easily modify any conclusions on your own if you want to include that row.

This gives us the following simple statistics:

 Totals: 11 14 3 16 14 16 Mean 0.41 0.52 0.11 0.59 0.52 0.59 Std Dev 0.8 1.12 0.42 0.75 0.8 0.75

There is still one “vaccine” death report with a 4.46 standard deviation which one could argue is an outlier but I’m leaving it in. The numbers we are dealing with are just so small that things may look odd when they really aren’t.

At least 76% of the U.S. population, just under 250,000,000 people, has had at least one dose of one of the vaccines.

Our sample is 27 people. A rough rule of thumb is that people knows about 600 people. I think that is a bit high but let’s go for it since it is based on some evidence as opposed to my gut feel from a collection of other sources (sociological issues develop when the groups get larger than about 200). But knowing 600 is different than having a tribe of 600.

With this information our 27 reports represents about 16,200 people.

This means that the odds of dying from COVID-19 is about 16 / 16,200 or 0.099%. This is not the odds of dying once you were infected. This is the odds of dying after living through two years of the pandemic and taking whatever precautions, including vaccinations, these people engaged in.

The odds of dying from the “vaccine” is about 3 / 12,312 or 0.024%. This set of people deliberately exposed themselves to this risk which is about 1/5 the risk of dying if they were to continuing using whatever precautions to avoid being infected and dying of COVID. But these numbers are too small to have much reliability. A difference of just one less or one more changes the odds to 0.016% or 0.032%. Even the higher number is less than one third the risk of a COVID death.

This does not take into account the apparent higher risk of vaccination for young people and the higher risk of COVID death for old people and other risk factors such as obesity, etc. At some point on the curves we are likely to see the tradeoffs cross over. It is easy to imagine that a young healthy person has a higher risk of death from the vaccine than from taking some precautions and risking a COVID infection and death. Also not taken into account is the probable higher vaccination rate in those with higher risk factors.

For the long term adverse effects the odds are worse for the “vaccine” than COVID. They are 14 / 16,200 versus 14 / 12,312 or 0.086% versus 0.113%. The same caveats as in the death rates apply.

The ER/hospitalization rates are 16 / 16,200 and 11 / 12,312 or 0.099% and 0.089%. Or for our sample size, essentially the same.

My conclusions from this is that the average risk of death from COVID is significantly greater than the average risk of death from the “vaccines”. The average long term adverse effects (known at this time) are a little higher.

I have had the two Moderna shots early last year and the booster shot 10 days ago. The side effects for the first two shots were a sore arm for several days, and chills, fever and low energy for one day. The booster effect were a slightly sore arm and slightly lower energy for one day. Barb’s experience with Pfizer were essentially the same for the first two and somewhat greater than mine for the booster a couple months ago. I’m confident we made the right decisions for us. Our risk of death is now much lower and we escaped the known adverse effects of the shots.

Make the best decision you can for yourself.

Share

## 25 thoughts on “Statistics experiment results”

1. Still way too early to fully evaluate the risk from the vaccines. We might be seeing serious sequelae several years from now. The fundamental issue with the vaccines is simple. Risk vs benefit. The risk from catching Covid for people under 65 is vanishingly small. Even smaller if you aren’t obese. The benefit from the vaccine is essentially zero. It does NOT prevent you from becoming sick….and there’s NO WAY to know if the vaccine may or may not have ameliorated your sickness….it’s simply NOT something we can measure. Therefore since the risk from the disease is miniscule, the benefit from the vaccine essentially nonexistent and the risks from the vaccines are real…..and potentially even worse then we currently know, the rational decision is to NOT GET THE VACCINE. Perhaps the very elderly can benefit from it….but normal healthy younger people have no need for it.

• I understand the concern about long term serious serious effects from the “vaccine” which may not have shown up yet. Are you saying we do know the possible long term effects of COVID are less than that of the “vaccine”?

If not, then how can you base your decision on the unknown risks of one and ignore the unknown risks of the other?

2. Several things.
Compare these number to any previous vaccine- they are VASTLY higher.
The risk of death from covid for the young is much lower than it is for the old. The vaccine risk for you young is at least as high, and maybe much higher, than it is for the old. So when you are comparing aggregate numbers it is essentially stipulating that trading the lives of the young to save the old is a good trade-off. i would disagree.
The vax lots are not consistent, either in how dangerous they are, nor in the geographic distribution of the hot lots, in very worrisome ways.
There is no long-term safety data.
Many of the vax injuries will be dead in <5 years; things like myocarditis have a 50% 5-year death rate, and some reports have indicated that 1 in 1000 or more healthy young men who get the shot will develop that, when they have almost no chance of dying from covid (different reports have different numbers, one from a private CA school was 1 in 95 https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/estimated-1-in-95-boys-diagnosed , another was 1 in 300).
There is evidence that the damage to the immune system is cumulative.
The more highly vaxxed the country, the higher the covid-like disease infection rates…..

If someone wants to take an experimental shot, that's there right. But if you can't have basic bodily autonomy because there is a mandate…. that's a huge red line not to be crossed.

• You trust the sources saying there are “hot lots” and the vax injuries will result in death in less than five years, etc. but don’t trust the FDA approval process? How is it that you determine which can be trusted and which cannot?

My statistics experiment was to specifically address this problem by generating a new data set which was unlikely to be contaminated by corporate and/or political bias.

• I used to work for the federal government in law enforcement. I was also an Army counterintelligence agent. I know better than to trust the government. Actual quote:

“We enforce the law, we don’t obey it.”

• Actual quote from my experience, “See this badge? That means the law does not apply to us.”

3. Oh, I’m also now up to my 3rd plague page tracking stories about it.
https://www.thestarscameback.com/plague/
https://www.thestarscameback.com/plague2/
https://www.thestarscameback.com/plague3/
Some of the links it has, like this one https://www.saveusnow.org.uk/covid-vaccine-scientific-proof-lethal/ have links to a lot of resources. in this specific case, 1011 scientific papers about how and why the vax is dangerous.
This one https://rumble.com/vt62y6-covid-19-a-second-opinion.html is 5 hours of congressional testimony, and some of the numbers are pretty damning.

4. I’m the “60 serious reactions and 4 deaths” from the vaccine row. These were all in the same Army training unit last year, and all in a two week period. I didn’t include the hundreds of others from other units, who filled the hospital at this one base. Healthy, active young men are much, much more likely than older people to suffer from the vaccine. As is already well known. See, for example, the incredible number of heart attacks in athletes last year.

Not mentioned: The death rate for 20-60 year old people has increased 40% since the vaccines were put into widespread use. These deaths are overwhelmingly heart attacks and strokes. The rate of miscarriages and stillbirths has more than tripled.

• This would square with the “some lots are hot and cause a very high rate of problems” and the “hot lots are not randomly distributed, and seem to target more conservative areas” data points.

Nothing like taking out or crippling a lot of patriotic young men before the major overt actions are started. Meanwhile, a lot of military age males are streaming across the borders… but they are not required to get vaxxed.

• Ahhh! That makes sense. You did draw your sample from a different data set. Everyone else was (probably) a somewhat random sample of the population. Yours was mostly from those known to be most at risk from the “vaccine”.

• Can you think of any other medical product that is a much greater risk to a healthy young man than to the elderly and sick? I can’t.

• Thou shalt not sacrifice the young on the altar of the old.

5. My wife and I were both vaccinated, and both received the booster – Modena in all cases. I had a slightly sore arm for a couple of days, my wife had mild sniffles after the second shot.

We live in a rural location with perhaps an even split of vaccinated and not. Among the 40 households on our hill, I know of no serious consequences from vaccinations. Around 8-10 people contracted the first strain of Covid, with serious illness. Some of them caught Omicron later. Our neighbor across the street – vaccinated – caught Omicron and was pretty drained of power for about three days, and then recovered with a sore throat for about two more days.

I am not terribly worried about long term vaccination effects. I fought off follicular lymphoma over 10 years ago, a blood cell cancer with a nasty habit of reoccurence at shortening intervals, until it can’t be treated effectively. I entered a clinical trial that piled chemotherapy on top of radiochemotherapy upon 4 years of quarterly immunotherapy. Compared to all that, a couple of overhyped flu shots is nothing. By the way, the clinical trial – “human experimentation” – to those terrified of the mRNA vaccine – put me into permanent remission. I probably had some side effects – my tinnitus in one ear got worse, a known side effect. Was it worth it? I’d say yes, since I’m still alive and would have died 12 years ago had I not sought treatment.

• Specific gene therapy, based on your own DNA, is completely different from a mass-produced gene-altering “vaccine” that does next to nothing to stop the disease it is purported to treat, while killing healthy young people.

“The doctor cut off my gangrenous hand, and it saved my life. Therefore, we should cut off everyone’s hand. It’s for their own good.”

6. All that. And they still won’t give you Ivermectin which would have flattened the curve. And prevented the hospitals from being overrun. Why not?
Why are we still calling mRNA a vaccine when it’s not stopping you from catching, suffering from, or from spreading the virus?
Were arguing the merits of something that was never needed in the first place. And is still being FORCED on people that were never in danger. Why?
All-in-all this is just another flu. Some live through it, some don’t.
But when known criminals are hyping this thing?
It never passed the smell test.

7. I don’t think the argument over the vaccines has much, if anything whatsoever, to do with the risks of taking it verses the risks of refusing it. Rather it’s been about whether the individual has any right to decide for himself, and whether certain findings and certain opinions of medical professionals can even be allowed in public. THAT argument has no statistics in it because the answer is based on moral standards and not numbers.

We’re not getting out of this. If it’s not COVID it will be something else, like “Climate Change”. The Romish authoritarians MUST have something upon which they can hang their age-old, perennial argument, “You must comply, else you’re endangering everyone else— You have no right to endanger everyone else!”

That’s all that any of this has ever been about. It’s why the generations-old and rigorously asserted, “My Body, My Choice!” was so easily abandoned by the left in favor of “Your Body, Our Choice!”

Furthermore, as we’ve seen well enough to be certain about it, the numbers (which we are told don’t lie) are more often based on political and social ideology (which always lies) than on any real science. Someone dies WITH COVID and it’s counted as a death FROM COVID. Thus the numbers we’re inputting are false to begin with. There’s nothing you can do with those numbers to make them valid except to make them valid as evidence against the perpetrators who are asserting them. Nation-wide, we all know that there is political motivation expressed in the raw data. Garbage in, garbage out.

Your numbers can never explain the (throughly predictable, and indeed predicted) transition from “Two weeks to flatten the curve so the hospitals aren’t overwhelmed” to, essentially, “You’re guilty of murdering thousands if you don’t comply!”

The hospitals were so devoid of patients they had to lay off large numbers of staff, medical care professionals were losing their jobs, and now “the curve” has been forgotten altogether because it never had anything to do with anything.

• Yup, this. even if the data didn’t say it’s the most dangerous vaccine-like-product ever, this would still be an iron-clad argument against any sort of mandate.

“You must take the individual risk and get the vax to protect everyone else!”

“You must take the personal risk and give up your guns to protect the community at large!”

It’s the same argument, and equally flawed. It will be used, leveraged, into tracking apps and asking permission to go places and do things, based on your continued “good behavior/taking the most recent booster.”

No. The vax passports and mandates fail the Jews in the Attic test.

• In the broader sense I agree with you. The argument should be over coercion versus “my body my choice”. Even if it could be proved the “vaccines” were 100% safe and 100% effective. Your body is your domain and should never be violated in such a manner without extraordinary circumstances and due process on an individual level (as in lethal injection after a fair trial for a heinous crime).

My postings of the subject were intended to be over the claim that “no animals survive the testing” and the implications that the “vaccines” are likely to be deadly to most humans. Things have drifted some…

8. In prior outbreaks where vaccinations were mandated, the rationale for the mandate was that the vaccinations did stop the spread of the bug. I can get my head around that argument even if I might feel that I was compromising my morals by forcing someone to do something they didn’t want to do.

For this particular vaccine, it doesn’t actually stop the spread. It probably provides some protection for the individual from death due to Covid, but that is about it. Given that, getting this vaccination is a personal choice and mandates for everybody to get the jab are neither moral nor ethical.

I believe that this is pretty straightforward so when I see governments pushing for something that is obviously (at least to me) immoral and unethical, I have to ask “why?” I have no answer for the question, but historical governments doing this never had what I would consider a good reason, so I worry.

As you say, prepare accordingly.

9. I find it illuminating that Fooci applied for a patent for this vaxx back in ’06, and it was refused, due to it not having any characteristics of a vaccine. None of the benefits in any fashion, apparently. Then the lie that they whipped it up pretty much “overnight” after the covid hit the US. Yeah, right. Patent trail starts in 1998, iirc. Hundreds of patents on covid19.

What’s that saying about politicians? “His lips are moving, he must be lying.”

• There are many things said and actions taken that make one suspicious. But this is a government entity after all. Competency is not a core value even if they do manage to not be evil.

10. I know several people who have had serious COVID, and a few bloggers I have been following for years. I don’t know or have heard from anyone who had serious vaccine effects. YMMV.