It's called "using precise language", which is necessary when you're doing actual science.
Or are you suggesting that we shouldn't use causal relationships when trying to total the number of deaths from the COVID vaccine? are these "Quantum deaths"?
Discussion
I'm not complaining about the precision of the language. In fact, I think it's useful that you were so precise.
We don't know how many people died or were disabled by covid vaccines. We only know how many deaths "were attributed" to them.
That's a passive use of a verb, so the important question if we want to make a true cost/benefit analysis is to understand who did the attributing and how that attributing was done (or not done, as the case may be).
One way around this is to look at expected death curves before and after the vaccine. The problem is that there are so many confounding variables (covid itself, the terrible covid hospitals protocols, lockdowns, etc).
We really don't know how many people died or were disabled by the shots.
Yeah okay sure, by that logic though, we don't know how many people get killed or disabled because there's an ion storm on Saturn or something.
So just like I'm not going to presume that Mercury in retrograde is going to cause me to lose money in the stock market, there's no reason to presume that there are any more deaths from the covid vaccine then what can be *actually* be attributed to it.
that was pretty much my point - it's hard to attribute the increased deaths after covid to the vaccine because there were other government measures that probably also contributed to increased deaths and disability.
So, since we're not going to speculate on those other contributing factors, let's go back to your original statement about how many deaths are *actually* attributed to the shots:
How were those attributions made?
Testing for this note… we made seven attempts to⚡zap this note, using your lightning address starting with "thrummingbush60364", over a period of 11 minutes. Six of the zaps were successful, but one of the zaps failed. Average zap time was 4965ms (5.0 seconds). We consider this zap time slow... generally, zaps should complete in under two seconds. (Other Nostr users might think your zaps are broken, might not zap you again.) We recommend you receive zaps with a well-connected, cloud-based Lightning node to reduce inbound zap latency.