Something Stinks, But This Time it Ain’t my Ass…

I’m not sure when common sense and critical thinking ceased to be defining traits of the human-animal, but each time I venture into public these days, it’s clear to me those once useful skills now exist in the land of the dodo.

But instead of getting myself riled up thinking about stupid motherfuckers cruising alone in their cookie-cutter SUV’s wearing face-nappies, or the endless stream of jagoffs slathering their hands in chemicals each time they feel the need to paw something new, our time today will be much better spent sharing perspective — perspective concerning the ludicrous spin, bullshit, and outright lies our trusted “information providers” inundate us with on a daily basis.

Let’s consider the biggest elephant in the room for example…

There’s a lot of anxiety and confusion out there concerning an experimental mRNA therapy technology that’s making its way ’round the planet. Pfizer-BioNTech calls it BNT162b2, and the mainstream media refers to it as the COVID-19 vaccine — the miracle cure that will bring normalcy back to the insane asylum we lovingly refer to as Earth.

Instead of convoluting this post with semantics of what a vaccine is or isn’t, and why gene therapy is a far more accurate term for Pfizer’s emergency-approved medication, let’s just cut to the chase…

After an unprecedented development-period of only a year, Pfizer announced to the world it had produced a “vaccine” 95% effective in the prevention of the COVID-19 plague. Astonishing!

So how exactly did they derive this declaration of efficacy?

Let’s find out, using the good ol’ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as our trusted source of unbiased information…

Pfizer’s deduction of “effectiveness” comes down to the comparative analysis of who got sick in the vaccine group, versus who got sick in the placebo group.

The math basically goes like this:

100 x [1 – (8 / 162)] = 95%

And voila!! Our miracle cure is here!

Sounds impressive in a headline or soundbite, don’t it? But what does that number really mean? Let’s consider in a multiple-choice format:

A. If you take this drug, you’ll be 95% less likely to contract a PCR-confirmed, symptomatic COVID ailment compared to people getting sugar-water injections.

B. You’ll develop lifelong immunity to the plague.

C. You won’t spread the virus to others if you’re asymptomatic.

D. None of the above, but Jesus loves you.

Pfizer’s infection ratio is a statistical form of pure bullshit — a difference of 154 cases out of 34,922 test subjects.

If you want to understand effectiveness in a more accurate light, let’s crunch the numbers again — this time based on a practical analysis that’s divorced from the self-policing, Big Pharma spin which stands to net trillions from a drug legally protected against liability for adverse reactions and deaths.

Ready?

17,403 out of the 17,411 subjects in the vaccine group did not become ill*.
(*according to Pfizer’s chosen clinical definition of a COVID infection)

That translates to 99.954%

Impressive.

BUT…

17,349 out of 17511 subjects in the placebo group did not become ill either*. (*according to Pfizer’s chosen clinical definition of a COVID infection)

That translates to 99.075%

So what exactly does that mean?

Let’s do the math…

99.954 – 99.075 = 0.879

That’s less than a 1% difference.

If investigative journalists still existed (which they don’t), and they were allowed to share ideas without censorship (which they can’t), here’s an example of a headline (based on the numbers from the CDC) that you might find yourself reading on your smartphone one morning while eating toxic toaster pastries…

Pfizer vaccine clinically proven to provide an almost 1% greater chance of protection against COVID-19

If attention spans in our society were a little longer, you might read something like this:

Pfizer has been given emergency medical approval for a new, never-before-approved mRNA therapy technology. If you choose to receive this medication twice, you will have a 0.88% greater chance of not becoming infected by a mild case of COVID-19. Pfizer has no data determining immunity from future infection, nor data concerning protection against asymptotic transmission. Animal trials to follow.

Are you starting to understand how spin works? The 95% number compares people with illness, but completely discounts the overwhelming majority of participants who did not become sick.

Crunch the numbers for yourself.

So let’s reiterate this one more time, BonerFruit style:

If you wanna be a guinea pig for an experimental, never-before-approved mRNA therapy technology with no long-term studies, the Pfizer vaccine will give you a 0.879% greater chance of not becoming infected with COVID-19. If you’re wary of “vaccine” side effects, you can take 2 placebo jabs, 14 days apart, and have a 99.075% chance of not contracting COVID-19.

If you’re truly concerned with improving your mental and physical well being, I’ll give you some advice…

Turn off the fucking news. And never again take to heart the bullshit propaganda that corporate-controlled douchebags spout from their talking heads. Maybe eat some clean food too, every now and then. A hike through the woods wouldn’t hurt either.

It’s time to relearn how to think for yourself. If that notion scares you, then I have one more recommendation you might be more attuned to…

Wear a diaper on your face for the rest of your life. Maybe 2 diapers. Hell, why wait for a WHO recommendation to quintuple mask? Start today! You’ll send a message to family and friends that “saving lives” is all that matters, while you slowly cause yourself brain damage asphyxiating on your own carbon dioxide and bacterial output.

Your call.

Peace out, I’m gonna go take a dump.