\
  The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
BackRefresh Options Favorite

mRNA vaccines do more harm than good

https://x.com/forallcurious/status/2034366988219556084 http...
peace missile
  03/20/26
https://theconversation.com/cancer-vaccines-could-transform-...
UN peacekeeper
  03/20/26
CLAIM: “A study of over a million kids found myocardit...
UN peacekeeper
  03/20/26


Poast new message in this thread



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2026 9:22 AM
Author: peace missile

https://x.com/forallcurious/status/2034366988219556084

https://x.com/theblaze/status/2034652197225705733

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5847811&forum_id=2,#49756995)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2026 9:25 AM
Author: UN peacekeeper

https://theconversation.com/cancer-vaccines-could-transform-treatment-and-prevention-but-misinformation-about-mrna-vaccines-threatens-their-potential-276809

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5847811&forum_id=2,#49757003)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 20th, 2026 9:27 AM
Author: UN peacekeeper

CLAIM: “A study of over a million kids found myocarditis only in the vaccinated, proving the shots caused heart problems and unvaccinated kids were spared.” FACT: The study is real, but the article’s conclusion is false. The study observed zero myocarditis cases in the unvaccinated *within that specific dataset and short follow‑up window*, and the authors explicitly warned that this does NOT mean unvaccinated kids don’t get myocarditis. Myocarditis is extremely rare in children, so a matched sample can easily show zero cases by chance. The study did not compare vaccinated vs. unvaccinated kids who had COVID infection, and large national datasets consistently show myocarditis risk is higher after COVID infection than after vaccination. The article also ignores the study’s finding that adolescents saw a net benefit from vaccination (reduced hospitalization risk outweighed myocarditis risk). The headline turns a narrow statistical observation into a sweeping biological claim the study itself rejects. This is a textbook case of misframing: cherry‑picking a rare-event count of zero, ignoring the authors’ warnings, omitting infection‑related myocarditis risk, and presenting political commentary as scientific interpretation.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5847811&forum_id=2,#49757012)