ERROR 301 (@realcaseyrollins@pleasehug.me) @realcaseyrollins@gameliberty.club

@freemo @obi I feel that the study means what it says, but I respect your opinion if you disagree or distrust its numbers.

@freemo @obi If this is the case, should we even be reading these kinds of studies?

@freemo @obi I thought you have to have had the #Coronavirus before you can get the antibodies. Would that count as an "incident"? Perhaps some of these people are naturally immune and were born with antibodies.

@freemo

You said "it was as serious as they said", but when @obi pointed out that the study shows that more infections means a lower death rate (meaning it's actually less serious than they said), you claim that the False Positive Paradox invalidates that conclusion. I would just like to know why.

@freemo @obi It just doesn't makes to me that the conclusion of a study saying that there are more infections than previously thought should not be that there are more infections than previously thought.

There's nothing about a False Positive Paradox that invalidates that conclusion.

@freemo
What conclusion does it draw?
@obi

@freemo
The people running the study must know about the Paradox; if so, why would they make such a worthless study?
@obi

@freemo
What about the USC LA study?
@obi

@freemo
So...just ignore the studies showing high infection rates? 🤔
@obi