1/n I have been sitting on this information for weeks on end, waiting someone to highlight it. But, if I tell you I will be subjected to 'being special' treatment. So, I wont give you the fish, I will teach you how to catch it.
-
Show this thread
-
-
Replying to @OS51388957 @federicolois
Just followed your steps. There is nothing to be careful about. It's a fraudulent paper. Plain and simple. Thank you.
1 reply 3 retweets 22 likes -
-
Replying to @federicolois
How so? Come on. I think it's time to stop the obscurity and insinuation.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @OS51388957
Federico Andres Lois Retweeted Zugzwang
Federico Andres Lois added,
Zugzwang @zugzwang2007Replying to @federicoloisSo there are two lots of missing C19 deaths: (a) 878 cumulative deaths per Worldometers not included in the 1113 and (b) 272 deaths included in the 1113 that are not in Tables 2 and 3. The sound of a coach and horses being driven through the stats is clearly to be heard.1 reply 2 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @federicolois @OS51388957
Some of the missing ca. 700 cumulative deaths from Worldometers (a) must be people who tested positive for SARS-2 before Jan. 24, right? It's just unclear how much.
1 reply 2 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @eugyppius1 @OS51388957
That's an upper bound yes, because essentially date of death vs date of report differences in methodology BUT still the number is just too high even if it is half of it.
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes
yes, it's too high.
-
-
so the study carefully avoids consideration of group-2 mortality & also works with apparently 'sanitised' numbers, from which some portion of group-2 mortality has been pre-excluded
0 replies 2 retweets 14 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.