people with blood disorders get clots.... its kinda obvious
people with heart disease have heart attacks/failures.. kinda obvious
people with allergies have allergic reactions.. kinda obvious

do you get it yet

they know the average number of people that suffer from their pre-existing condition each year.
they divide the down by 182 to work out how many will sufer in a 48 hour period.

then if more then this number suffer in that period. they then know its a statistical anomoly which suggests something else caused it

again if there were masses more deaths within a 48 hour window.. then obviously there is something causing it that is happen on that certain event period thats not happening outside the event period

.. the thing is higher numbers are not occuring
media is just seeing people out the 182 people that would die at some point. in a 48 hour period of a year.
and then when 1 dies and it happen to be their birthday. anniversary or day they got socked or had a vaccine.. blame the event for the cause.

like i said and logic dictates. if the average is 1 death per 48 hours.. but suddenly say 5 died on the same day.. then it is deemed out of the ordinary and would be looked into

take europe. they reacted fast when 4-6 had blood clots but then noticed that 4-6 is not out of the ordinary for any other day no matter the event

please learn some basic facts of life. basic numbers of what happens in reality..
if you think absolutely no one had bloodclots before 2020.. your fooling yourself

edit: this is not science guesswork. this is common sense. something you need to learn before you can even grasp science

an asset last year may have rose by 8% but that does not mean it will do so every year

also. you might end up buying in at the assets 8% ATH and then it drops

meaning invest $1000.. it drops by 6% meaning at year end you get $940
but your bank wants $1060
yep you lost out on 10% having to pay $100 from your own income

if the vaccine was faulty/caused heart attacks. you would see more then the average deaths of heart attacks

i know numbers are not your thing. i know understanding science is not your thing
but try to learn some basics

the test looks for 4 specific criteria and if it has 4 specific identifiers its classed as covid
they take a sample and replicate it. if it only takes 15 cycles.then thats a strong positive test to appear so easily and having all 4 markers
if it takes 36 cycles then there is not much if any covid thus deemed negative

when a new mutation appears that is several generations away from the main known strains it wont have the particular critieria. so they have to put it into VUI.(vaccine under investigation) to isolate and go through the koch, rivers bell processes (isolate ensure the isolate infects and causes symptoms). then sequence what they have and compare it to known samples/sequences EG a ebola sample wil be nothing like covid. but covid strains are 90%+ alike and nothing like a bacteria or exosome or human cell..yes they can tell the difference
and then they look for a identifier they can test for
....
its like decades of man thinking woman are only large chested blondes. .. then a moderately chested brunette turns up. now you need to reassess your criteria of 'woman' realising there is more then one type.
you dont just say 'she is not a woman she failed the woman test. lets call her lizardkind'.... no you reevaluate the criteria of what defines a woman

this process of identifying new strains and isolating and finding its unique features has been done many times over the year.. i think we are on generation 20 by now. so its not new.

PCR tests do their job they look for the specific things they are suppose to do.
and yes lab techs are ever evolving the parameters as new mutations pop up

lockdowns do work
when you realise that not everyone self isolates.. that some do actually move around. there is still cases with those who mingle.

those who successfully isolated have remained covid free all year. they dont become a statistic
the only way to stop new cases is to 100% stop it spreading.
virus has no arms or legs.. no brain. so the way it passes is by people mingling and gathering..

if people followed the lockdown. cases would be even lower.. but as can be seen by the charts. cases did drop when lockdown began and cases rose when lockdowns relaxed.

and how many lightbulbs can a mouse replace
how many cars can a guineapig manufacture
how many rats can farm a field and create more produce than it consumes

so i guess you are talking about rodents squandering their life on worthless exploits and will draw their last mortal breath not succeeding at anything meaningful

by the way, rats kill more rats then lab techs do

the CDC did not nor has ever said 94% of people died from something else
its your own misunderstanding and thus YOUR contradictions

i know you will say it cant be YOUR contradictions because you are just copy/pasting a script from a conspiracy site. and thus try absolving you by saying it must be THEIR contradiction

but YOU on this forum believe the conspiracy contradictions. YOU then make posts. so it becomes YOUR contradictions

try using research. logic your own mind.
stop just repeating conspiracy theories

learn about the co-morbidity report and what it actually says and means

nope. its the hope of normalcy
the vaccine is based on the january strain. and you are 95% safe from that. and as long as a country only harbours that strain.. all is great. back to normal. once everyone is herd immune(covid recover or vaccine)

but if a new strain 25 generations down the line(12month) becomes the dominant one. you might have some immunity but its not going to be 95%.

the 2-8fold loss of protection means dropping immunity protection from:
95% to 90%(2)-60%(
the south africa strain even for covid recoverees of the jan2020 strain. and those vaccinated using the jan 2020 formula, are not 95% protected from the south african strain. but more like 60% protected

but because not even 40% are fully vaccinated. not even 40% got and recovered from covid
herd immunity is under 40%the numbers are low and bad. because having one dose is not 95% its actually just 60%
yep the numbers of people that tare actually properly protected is not as much as the number of people covid recovered+first jab vaccinated.

ill say it one more time.
even if 100% of the population were vaccinated with 1 dose. they are only 60% protected. they reach 95% after second dose(after summer)
those recovered from covid in say march-june are over 90% protected from current local strains. but only 60% protected from the s.africa strain if their first infection was a local strain.

so we are not out of the woods
if the s.africa strain dominations circulation today..
if you calculate the amount of people who recovered and had vaccine first dose.
its under 25% 'herd immunity' against the south african strain
and only 40% currently against local strains

the idea is and the hope is.. keep the S.african strain outside a countries borders. get immunity up to 95% from local strains via vaccination/covid recover(if lucky to not die)
and get a new vaccine formulae for s.african strain and immunise people this year BEFORE s.african strain dominates a countries circulation

so expect restrictions to still apply in some form to try to keep the spread down to avoid fast mutations
as no one wants the s.african strain re-mutated over a year where the next formulae is behind.. again

keeping the s.african strain out from spreading reduces the speed/likelyhood of it mutating so fast to overtake vaccine formulas and distribution time

so yea with only 24% of people somewhat protected. its not the old strain thats concerning. its the new strains people should avoid. and thus still take precautions

(border quarantine for all arrivals(like australia) work better than getting everyone inside a country to mask up)
(prevention at the border.. is better than letting it spread and everyone have to mask up due to the selfish travellers/vacationers/international business people)
(but too many people want to travel without quarantines so UK/US still let planes fly and risk bring in new strains)

well. if you checked the source and the source of the source you can get the actual numbers.. not percentages
heck they even have images showing separate countries
heck they even have it broken down by age aswell

take the march spike. doube rise in deaths in 75+ ~half a rise in people aged under 60
then the autumn spike there were less elderly excess deaths than youger excess deaths
using logic this is because elderly were not self isolating in march. but were isolating in autumn so more protected

its actually worth a look if your interested in actual statistics..
but if you just want an excuse to ignore statistics then keep playing your ignorance game that you dont accept a stat due to its format(lame excuse)

global warming. is a non-thing

.. some area's will get more colder
.. some area's will get more warmer
.. some area's will get more dryer
.. some area's will get more wetter

this is climate change. and yes it is real..
the controversies are not that its not happening. but instead how much it will happen by and in which area's and by what cause

EG california is not in drought due to carbon. but instead due to damming up rivers. which then conserve the water in one location. making the other locations dry out.

the large reservoirs actually conserve the water causing less evaperation.

try it.
have 2 cups of water with exact same amount of water in it
find some paving slab in your yard. and pour 1 cup on that slab.
put the other cup next to it.... and wait.

you will notice the thin layer spread across a wide area evaporates. while the cup(reservoir) conserves water

so yes.. less water spread out in streams. irrigation canals on ground.. and instead hdden in pipes sewers and stored in reservoirs is causing the californian drought
and yes its a man-made cause disrupting the natural water cycle
...
the carbon game is more about human lung health and also just a fundraising game
coal/oil refineries in the 1980's knew they had 50-70 years of resources left to mine.
2030-2050 thats it finito. no more oil/coal
so they know they have to adapt.. but dont want to pay for the adaptation/upgrade
and so 'carbon tax' 'carbon grants' to fund their transition to renewables

mined coins actually factor in mining costs as the base value
think about it
if it didnt cost $900+ to mine gold. prices would not be above $1k
if it cost only $2 (dinner spoon and a coffee filter) to mine gold from home. everyone would sell for $3.

yes speculation and sentiment adds on top to form the final price. but the base value of cost is a factor of the minimum the price will ever be.

different altcoins mined have different values and you can gauge the %difference if you calculate the cost of each.. and then looking at the price of each you can see which ones are speculatively bubbled up with too much sentiment. or which ones are at the bottom value.

..
when it comes to ICO that just premine all circulation limit and just hand out coins like confetti
trying to judge the true base value is harder. you have to look at things like their employee costs and operational costs. this is hard because most ICO dont even release this info clearly/regularly/at all
the only possible metric of value is what i call the ponzi value.
if coins were bought for $3.. people wont sell for less. as they would be losers
so if you can look at transactions and coin movements and price them at at time of trade. you can gain an insight into their min price sentiment of willing to sell for.
EG if 90% were bought at $3.10 and 10% were bought at original ICO of $3
then the majority sentiment would have a good support wall of a $3.10 base value

ofcourse if you can get some business finances info. then if a business is valued at say $63m and there are 21m coins that also holds weight of a $3 a coin sentiment.
if the business grows 2x in its product launch/expanding business. then slowly traders will buy up to the $6 sentiment. however if the coin price moved to $6 with only 10% of holders. then the base value majority is still at $3.10 base value with a 90% chance of a dip
where as if 90% pushed it to $6.. then only a 10% chance of a dip.

so coins. whether mined/premined-ICO has got its own way innately and naturally of levelling the playing field

you just have to know what to look for to know its true majority bottomline value..
then if its price is near true bottomline value or inflated by speculation/sentiment
then people just buy at whats deemed value sell at the inflate (buy low-sell high)

bitcoins peak of $60k.. can reset to ~$37k where it will hit a active trader good majority support wall
a complete reset wont go to zero. i believe the ultimate bottom being ~$22k hitting a hard wall of support

ill explain(bare with me)
theres 70% active utxo coin movements(last 6 month) with a value sentiment when they moved of $37k plus
so deem that as 70% of active circulation not wanting to sell below $37k
..
$37k the good support wall for traders
...
as for miner sentiment and the ultimate bottom line
best mining efficiency is at a min cost of $22k right now. no miner would sell below this.
so deem this as the absolute zero being $22k

however some miners have higher costs.
(hardware cost averaged over 9 month recoup/upgrade time..=$16.4. base hw cost per btc)
(plus ~$1.4k extra per 1cent extra in electric cost)
so 4cent=$22k...5cent=$23.4k....6cent=$24.8k....7cent=$26.2k....8cent=$27.6k
    9cent=$29k..10cent=$30.4k..11cent=$31.8k..12cent=$33.2k

iceland industrial (mining farm) are at 4cent(buy aswell as mine if dip below $23k)
china industrial (mining farm) are at 4cent (buy if dip below $23k)
US industrial (mining farms) are at ~6cent (buy if dip below $24.8k)
--they wont stop mining. they will just grab the oppertunity to hoard extra coin

US home hobby mining users are at ~12cent (stop mining and instead buy if dip below $33.2k)
UK home hobby mining users are at ~26cent (stop mining and instead buy if dip below $52.8k)
--yep UK home hobby miners wont mine and instead buy if price dips by 12% right now

japan-germany-denmark home hobby miners already have higher costs so are not mining at home and prefering to buy
...
think about it big US institutional miners could get coin on markets at $24.8k and just buying like crazy
then china/iceland at $22k..
this will require a hell of alot of pressure to fight off the bull of china/us buy frenzy

...
so yea i think $22k is the new 'zero'
and $37 is a good 70% of active traders minimum sentiment

wallstreet learned this lesson 100 years ago..
wall street doesnt hoard/hodl
they day trade.
because they have such low fees because they are at the central partnership with exchanges they day trade at the micro penny level. taking small amounts 0.05% every hour which add up and add up(1.2%/day)

i learned this lesson in 2012
well. kinda. as i only play with a small percentage of my hoard to avoid risk
but that small allotment .. i dont just leave it on an exchange doing nothing for 100 days hoping to 2x those funds. instead i day traded it
1% a day is better then waiting 100 days for 100%
5k turns to 13k by taking daily 1%..
   1% movements happen soo many times its hard to avoid an oppertunity
5k turns to 10k by waiting for 100%..
   100%(2x) happens so random. it can happen in 3 months or 3 years. no guarantees

so if its good for wall street. its good for smart bitcoin traders. plus its also less risky.. just dont get too greedy thinking you can micro-hodl for 5-10% or you could be losing out by waiting longer. missing out on more the 5-10 opportunities for 1%(netting you 5.1%-10.4% respectively and more frequently)

funny because there are ~2.8mill deaths a year.
the report does not list 2.8mill+ deaths

it lists the ones that they know are covid related.
they know they are covid related because the symptoms and treatments are listed on a death certificate.

no one dies from "covid test positive"
it lists all their symptoms.

covid has a known list of symptoms. and yes having other medical issues can intensify the covid suffering.
people with gunshot wounds are not listed even if they had a covid positive test and a cough.

yes someone could have had pneumonia and fighting it for a month before they contracted covid. but it was the covid that intensified them and suffered the covid symptoms which caused their body to give up

the 94% is not saying they died of something else. it means something else intensified their covid suffering and they could not fight off covid due to how weak they were due to other things.
if they did not have covid they would have survived but still had their pre-existing co-morbidity meaning it was not the co-morbidity that was the cause.

if you want to find a conspiracy.. DONT MAKE ONE UP. DONT FAKE STATS

take for instance the cuomo retirement home cover up.. thats something i told you to look into which is/was a real thing to complain about. no need to fake stats or make up anything.

just a shame you prefer to make things up and misinform people with your silly games

a brave new world is a science FICTION book.. its not a scripture sent back from the future
its not even wikileaks. its fantasy

as for your numbers.. your forgetting about the 1.54% upper number

its not 0%-0.31%
its 0-1.54%

200 people in a republican gathering. socially distancing in september... upto 3 will die of covid
200 people at a gathering without social distancing in march.. upto 7 will die of covid

with all the drama of 1 woman dying in january amongst 1000 republicans.. i think its then funny how you think the same ignorance of social distancing would equate to upto 35 deaths due to covid. as no big deal to you

also id question the writers maths

118/mill population fatality is his number. but suggestion that translates to 0.2% infection fatality
1.18/10k
0.18/1k
0.018/100

that 0.018 is death per general population mortality rate.. not infection mortality rate
so mixing groups and rounding numbers and missing a decimal.. not good

and 100 mice will not be tested unless it passed the 10 mice trial
and 10 mice will not be tested unless it passed the 1 mouse trial

so in short. only 1 mouse has to suffer to deem the product a failure.

they wont just try it on 100 mice right from the start.
1 mouse can prevent 100 mice suffering if the product has major faults from the start

responsibility is not about blame/accusation.. its about duty of having to deal with/control something/someone

responsibility is on the custodian(key holder/parent)

if its your private keys its your funds. you are responsible for DYOR to learn about the recipient. learn if they can be trusted. and find out who/where/what they are
if you put your funds/kids into someone elses custody. you have not absolved yourself of responsibility but now there are twice as many precautions you have to keep an eye on. and they then have responsibility of their own aswell to look after whatever is in their custody

so dont just ignorantly trust them. research them.. because if they wrong you. you have a location and name to identify them to seek justice.
but keep in mind.. prevention is better than after-action.

it does not mean you caused it to happen(bad guys will be bad guys).
but lowering your own precautions will cause things to more then likely happen

even if you do everything possible. and bad things still happen. then atleast i hope you have taken responsible actions to limit the risk of them getting away with it

as for children/kidnapping and rape
when they are in proximity to you. your 100% responsible
when they are not nearby. you still have to have precautions to know where they are going. to teach them what to avoid. to trust they wont get themselves into harms way.
this is not about blaming anyone when it goes wrong. this is about being responsible to prepare and take care to reduce/avoid the risk of it happening.

its not blaming you for causing it after it happens. after all you didnt hire a kidnapper to kidnap
its about taking responsibility to reduce the risk before it happens. to prevent it happening

over-sexualised people will always do what they do. thats not your fault
just reduce the risk of its occurances affecting you or your family.
and if it still happens.. its on the rapist/kidnapper as the person to blame.

the issue i have with vegans/vegetarians is when they get soo wrapped up in the concept of animal consciousness and wanting to imagine them as humans that deserve human rights.. that they forget that their anger at animal testing makes them want to kill humans 'for the sake of the animals'

i am sorry to say this but we are top of the food chain.. in nature we are predators. in a fight for survival its either us or them. thats nature.

i get it you want utopia, peace amungst species. all living together in harmony..
i get it you dont want to eat animals and dont think of yourself as a predator.
but. if there was a choice between testing 1-1000* mice to save 100million humans. sorry but the mice have to suffer to save 100m from suffering

if one deer can feed a family for a week. to avoid starvation. sorry but that deer has to go

..
one thing you may want to learn outside of your 1980's vegan rhetoric.. is that labs do actually have some regulation. some limitations. some processes.
institutional labs cant just grab some animals and torture them out of curiosity
they actually only get funding and a schedule for a trial if that trial has a purpose that will benefit people

yes animal cruelty is bad. when its done for no purpose but some insane persons entertainment.
but lab trials have regulation/policies/limitations to not harm unless the social/health benefits are there

labs want to create products that do not harm. so they are not exactly there to poison animals on purpose.

*they instead try it on one animal. and if thats not harmful then they expand to multiple animals
they dont just poison 1000 animals in one go without pre-testing on less.
and if they see it does poison them.. they stop..
yep if something is really harmful and will cause suffering.. they know with just the first or first dozen

so the suffering rate is like 1-12.. not 1000-1million

he died from a heart attack. and had heart issues way before the vaccine

he did not die from:
allergic reaction
turning into a lizard from DNA mutation
needle infection
any other cause antivaxxers use to fear having the jab themselves

10% of americans have heart disease
640k die from heart disease each year
thats ~320k deaths in 6 months

with the goal of vaccinating everyone in 6 months. and a 48 hour 'symptom window'
thats about 3500 people that die naturally of their heart disease. who just happen to have had a event within 48 hours

yep its the same odds of 3500 people with heart disease dying within 48 hours of their birthday
yep its the same odds of 3500 people with heart disease dying within 48 hours of valentines day
yep its the same odds of 3500 people with heart disease dying within 48 hours of christmas

pick any day. call that an event. and you will find 3500 people died within 48 hours of that event
yet the event did not cause it.
emphasis: 3500 people die from heart attack every 48 hours of any day
83000 people with heart disease have a vaccine per 48 hour window

however if alot more than 3500 died on a certain event.. then they can look into that.
however the deathrate from vaccine relating to heart attack is no more than the statistical average expected
.... (usually a bad batch will show a statistic above the average eg 4000-83000 with heart disease every 48 hours of a vaccine. but not statistically meant to die in that year)

in europe there was a sign of a more apparent rise in bloodclot death which is why they stopped that batch and investigating.

however death from heart attack is normal amounts expected whether they had vaccine or not

yes 3% die..(1-5% depending on age/viral load)
but its not 99% mild , your 99% number is BS
which is where you are getting the wrong idea

anyway these numbers are not exact.. but you should get the concept and idea of roughly how things are more like


without social distancing/masks                            without social distancing/mask
65+ / younger with other complications                 younger without complications/healthier
2% asymptomatic                                                8% asymptomatic
8% minor                                                            32% minor
50% mild                                                            39% mild
24% severe                                                         16% severe
12% critical                                                         4% critical
4% death                                                            1% death

with social distancing(low viral load)                     with social distancing(low viral load)
65+ / younger with other complications                younger without complications/healthier
8% asymptomatic                                                14% asymptomatic
32% minor                                                          56% minor
34% mild                                                            25% mild
16% severe                                                         6% severe
8% critical                                                           1.5% critical
2% death                                                            0.5% death

...
by the way.try to use some logic for your 3% death 99% mild
firstly are you saying 1% died of covid severe. and 2% of mild.

sorry but that makes no logical sense.
someone doesnt just have mild covid. (cough/fever) and just inexplicably die without warning
most covid deaths are a progresssion where they go from
day1: minor (under 20% stay at this level and dont get worse)
day3:mild(30-60% stay at this level and dont get worse)
day10:severe(6-24% stay at this level and dont get worse)
day14: critical(2-12% stay at this level and dont get worse)
day15-60:0.5-5% die depending on their chance of survival/if they were intubated or not.
the 5% are more often the elderly left in care homes that have DNR so wont get respiratory treatment