Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Did Pfizer's Covid Vaccine Cause MASS MISCARRIAGES? Amber Athey DEBUNKS Naomi Wolf's Viral Claim" video.

  1. Well, it's only nanoparticles known to travel to other parts of the body, so . . . What could go wrong?
    22
  2. 💰💰💰💰💰 talks
    19
  3. THANK YOU WHAT happened to the Precautionary Principle?
    11
  4.  @Combaticus  I wrote a post showing the algebra and reasoning, and why this is a signal demanding further study. The post was removed. Now mathematics is censored.
    11
  5.  @paragonexperience  Give her an opportunity to correct her work. That used to be a principle and everything. She's not some lout, she's a published author.
    8
  6. The number "16 2/3" is an 11% increase over 15, because you have to add 11% of 15 to 15 to get there. Learn this math. You need it now. Watch for this post to be removed.
    7
  7. What? You mean you think a normal, educated, mathematically sophisticated person cannot figure out numbers? Then forget about it, just follow orders. This show is over. Even PLATO had a dialogue about how mathematics is universal to humans, nearly 2500 years ago.
    4
  8.  @jackchid6040  Since the Internet took off, I've learned that a lot of people don't even know about them. As in, 75% represents a 50% increase over 50% (because 75 is 50% greater than 50). Lots of people don't know how I got that. It "looks wrong."
    4
  9. Robbie, your intro was shameful.
    3
  10.  @michaelcre8  PERFECT analysis. Make a stand-alone post.
    3
  11.  @paragonexperience  Why would you accuse someone of lying when it is very plausible they made a mistake, and actually (wrongly) thought they were being accurate? Is this how your job treats you? You okay with that?
    3
  12.  @paragonexperience  BTW, you are accusing her of "lying" and I would bet a winning lottery ticket that you neither read the article nor examined the data. Therefore you are lying by pretending to know that she must be lying. Can you follow that, or is it too tough for you? Recursion is a thing. 😅
    3
  13.  @donnazukadley7300  Oh my gawd. I'm so sorry!
    3
  14.  @demitri2510  Which means it is uninformative. Anyone who listened carefully to the entire video understood that message which is truthful. We don't know whether these vaccines have an effect on fertility. We cannot assume either way.
    3
  15. Apparently, it is.
    3
  16.  @gigaman6  Not what she said.
    2
  17.  @gigaman6  16 2/3 % is NOT "well below average." She said that was slightly above the known average. The small sample size has an unacceptable margin of error, so we cannot really draw any solid conclusion. That is what she said.
    2
  18.  @johns9969  Too vague. First, the sample was too small to draw a conclusion, but large enough to signal a need for more study. 11 miscarriages out of 66 presumably healthy pregnancies up to that time, and thus 16.66%, is above the accepted baseline of 15%. And it's not a 1.66% increase, it's an 11% increase. ((16.66 - 15) ÷ 15) is how you figure that out.
    2
  19.  @gigaman6  Evidence?
    2
  20.  @adrianconnell7143  No idea. I only heard about it here.
    2
  21.  @paragonexperience  No one deflected. But you misrepresent what I said.
    2
  22.  @paragonexperience  Why can't you distinguish lying from making a mistake? Most people's mistakes are somewhat tendentious. Yours, for example.
    2
  23.  @michaelneufeld4515  Incorrect. But if I explain why, based on the numbers discussed and showing the algebra explicitly, this signals a possible 11% increase above baseline, it is removed.
    2
  24. Wow. My post actually showing the algebra was censored.
    2
  25.  @DynamicDolphin  False
    2
  26.  @sirfranklloyd  Exactly. This result should have served as a clue to study the issue rigorously. If they don't even care about pregnant women, they have no business in healthcare at all. And that they did this with a leaky vaccine that does NOT protect those around you is mind boggling.
    1
  27.  @paragonexperience  No more so than the mandates crowd. You forget the burden of proof is on THEM. Or always was prior to this. There used to be something called the Precautionary Principle. You must prove a medical procedure is safe and effective. If my concerns are not addressed, I have the right to decline it.
    1
  28.  @paragonexperience  Anyway, suppose someone lies about the vaccines, or any drug. Do you think that shifts the burden of proof? Great. Big Pharma needn't go to great lengths to test new drugs. They can just hire false flags! 🤣🤣🤣
    1
  29.  @paragonexperience  Well either my last post is being shadowed, or you're pretending it is. In any case . . . yawn. Toodles
    1
  30.  @paragonexperience  Fascinating. I can't find Wolf's article. It was retracted.
    1
  31.  @paragonexperience  OH WELL THAT'S A FAIR HEARING. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 love you, buddy, a joke a minute
    1
  32. Precisely.
    1
  33.  @DynamicDolphin  Wow. So people cannot do arithmetic. Or follow a simple report with numbers in it. No wonder America needs an army. You can't keep all this stuff for yourselves without a LOT of firepower.
    1
  34.  @michaelneufeld4515  I was surprised, too. But believe whatever you like.
    1
  35.  @michaelneufeld4515  Trash talking is always fine.
    1
  36. A post I wrote that showed the algebra expressly was subjected to sense or ship.
    1
  37. Her report was fine. The headline/framing is The Hill's fault. Again.
    1
  38. See. I used algebra today. 🤣
    1