Peters pulls all that together for us.
If they can’t get you “vaccinated” via a mandate, maybe they’ll be able to get you using the mafia. The insurance mafia.
How?
By citing a “study” – you know, The Science – published by the American Journal of Medicine, that associates not taking whatever drugs the government/corporations order you to take with…a higher likelihood that you’ll wreck your car.
Fortune cites the study, which claims that the un-drugged (the proper term to use, as these drugs are not vaccines since vaccines prevent infection and stop transmissions – and these drugs do neither) are “72 percent more likely to be involved in a severe traffic crash in which at least one person was transported to the hospital” than those who have been drugged.
The premise of this claim is not, however, evidence that being un-drugged has a negative effect on driving competence. It is an oily assertion of correlation with not-following-the-rules (as regards traffic rules) and not following orders, as regards the taking of drugs.
“The authors (of the study) theorize that people who resist public health recommendations might also ‘neglect basic road safety guidelines.’ “
Meaning, they assert a causal link between “resist(ing) public health recommendations” and “neglec(ting) basic road safety guidelines.” It is as “scientific” a theory as the one that insisted others must wear a “mask” to “protect” those who are already wearing one.
Or two.
It presumes that both “public health recommendations” – which are no such thing, since the “recommendations” carried the de facto force of law – and “road safety guidelines” are correct, ipso facto.
In fact, the “public health recommendations” (sic) were entirely wrong – and it was therefore sensible to “resist” them.
“Masks” – and maintaining a space bubble around you six feet feet in radius – did nothing to “stop the spread” of anything. In fact, they spread alienation and fear. They helped to instill millions of cases of pathological hypochondria. The drugs all-but-forced on the population were not vaccines, though people were deliberately misled to believe they were. Those who just took them, just trusting them, are discovering their trust was abused. Those who didn’t just trust – who “resisted” the “recommendations” – have been proved right to have resisted them.
Man, no way could I not include that image, it’s just too perfect. Read it all, it’s one of Eric’s best yet.
3
- Entries
To make sense of that article, you have to know a lot of things. In this case, there are two more pieces of data:
1. Blacks were far less likely to take the shot than any other racial group. Something like 60% of blacks remain unvaxed.
2. You need to have read Steve Sailer’s research about the skyrocketing rate of black traffic fatalities since the Summer of George in 2020. He calls them “Deaths of Exuberance. ”
My guess is that much of the data that skews the Fortune article is blacks driving badly.
I couldn’t find the research referenced. If you have a link post it up.
I’m finding it rather difficult to come up with a connection between not getting “vaxxed” and bad driving.
I do know that with less traffic on the roads some drivers were driving much faster and bad wrecks occurred as a result. Perhaps that’s the connection?
The only way I take any shots is into my cold, dead body!!!
Let’s admit the obvious.
The unvaxxed are obviously going to have more accidents than the vaxxed, for one simple reason:
The vaxxed are dropping dead of Suddenly©.
The unvaxxed are still alive, and thus out driving.
Mystery solved.
QED
Raconteur Report: Official Trademark Registered
“The vaxxed are dropping dead of Suddenly©.”
OK, that’s a good one.