For reference,
Lmao how is it misinformation? He didn’t make any claims about risk compared to getting covid. The note was just the same irrelevant talking points you people love to bring up all the time
Don’t think that just because you’re not welcome on reddit that you’ll be welcome here.
If you want to debate the safety of vaccines, fuck off and get a medical degree and publish a paper.
To put it bluntly, you don’t have what it takes.
Musky Boy asked what is known as a leading question.
The community provided further information to answer that question, backed by statistical analysis.
How was it a leading question?
Because it leads the reader to believe that they would be safer not to get the vaccine shot.
How so?
Because Musky Boy conveniently leaves out the fact, that, according to the community provided resource he had deleted, whatever the risk is to have the side effect he was referring to, the risk is doubled for the actual disease the vaccine is protecting against, making it seem like the vaccine is more dangerous in at least this aspect as the disease itself.
Don’t bother, they’re sealioning you.
How do you tell the difference between someone asking you to show evidence for your claims, or clarifying your point, or having a normal conversation with you - and sealioning?
Can you give examples of both cases?
But he never made any claims regarding the risk of the disease. Why is it relevant to a discussion about potential side effects? Do you think everyone who discusses plane crashes is convieniently leaving out car accidents?
Humans are bad at making judgement calls. They suck at weighting chances and risks evenly. So yes, in a discussion about plane crashes, it should be noted at least once, that traveling by plane is the safest mode of transportation.
So that you, someone who might be afraid of flying, is not erroneously led to believe that they would be safer to not fly and instead travel by car, for example.
To bring this analogy back around, the community provided resource served the purpose of educating vaccine-sceptic people about the risk of getting the vaccine compared to not getting the vaccine and getting diseased instead.
The community provided resource did not detract or hamper informed discussion in any way, it merely served as context. Therefor deleting it can only be seen as petty.
And as a side note, please don’t try to tell me that Musky Boy was actually interested in having an informed debate. That would be a laughable claim, given his childish temper.
Why isn’t Musk apologizing for gassing six million Jews in WWII, and drink the adrenochrome from murdered babies to stay young for the last 80 years?
See? I didn’t make any claim. I asked why he isn’t addressing [obviously bullshit claims], all without saying that he actually did those things. The question implies a lot, but doesn’t directly make a claim. That’s what Musk is doing.
Meanwhile, what you are doing is called sea lioning.
Irrelevant talking point is when peer reviewed meta analysis.
We can’t ascribe everything to your consumption of dog cum, but we can’t ascribe nothing.
I guess the question is how much dog cum do you really drink?
Do you genuinely believe that to be a comparison of equal value to concern for side effects in medicine?
I find the fact that you’re not willing to give a straightforward answer really worrying. I’m simply asking a question, there’s no need to whatabout medicine when we’re talking about your dog cum consumption habits.
I seriously hope you don’t actually think this is remotely clever
You’re far to dim to grasp anything clever.
Just answer the question man, it’s not that hard, u less you’re scared of the woke media and it’s censorship of dog cum lovers?
deleted by creator
How so? I’m genuinely concerned.
