Twitter removes, then reinstates Florida Surgeon General's Covid vaccine warning tweet

[Anonymous]

It’s like Florida wants more of its citizens to die.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/flsurgeongen/status/1578515633159180289?s=46&t=WL_zrOTp0uvN8lrJuUecdw

Was Twitter in the right to delete this? I’m undecided as I don’t have a science background.

I dont think you have to have a science background to decide whether twitter should censor the FL surgeon general.

Science changes. Thats the whole point of scientific research. To test and validate what we know, while making discoveries to enhance our knowledge. Twitter is anti science because they oppose the discussion and inquiry necessary to improve our body of knowledge.

I’m sure Twitter acted after it heard from legit scientists and experts that the FLSG’s post was dangerous disinformation. The SG is not interested in a good faith discussion.

It doesn’t matter if Twitter heard from “legit scientists and experts.” Those people can be and often are wrong, too. That is the whole point of science. It is not about specious appeals to authority, but rather rigorous, empirical testing. Even if the Florida surgeon general is completely wrong, what should happen is that he should be refuted with actual evidence. Not silenced for being incorrect.

But where is the line? Hypothetically, should Twitter allow a post from a State SG advising that NOBODY get the flu shot? Many people would say no, so it's likely a majority of people would agree there is a line. Does this cross it? Some would say yes, considering the SG is hardly following standard thresholds for scientific discussion. No authors? Come on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s like Florida wants more of its citizens to die.

It's just that DeSantis doesn't care. He wants the White House, and he has promised something to his political hack Surgeon General.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

https://youcanknowthings.com/2022/10/09/a-critical-review-of-floridas-new-vaccine-analysis/

She finds four major flaws, all explained thoroughly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s like Florida wants more of its citizens to die.

They want less healthy young folks to have cardiac inflammation, and there is ample scientific evidence that the mRNA vaccines pose a risk of this. If you weren’t biased, you would review the data yourself and post a thorough analysis either refuting or confirming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s like Florida wants more of its citizens to die.

They want less healthy young folks to have cardiac inflammation, and there is ample scientific evidence that the mRNA vaccines pose a risk of this. If you weren’t biased, you would review the data yourself and post a thorough analysis either refuting or confirming.

Sorry. There is ample evidence that the FL Governor and SG put politics above public health.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s like Florida wants more of its citizens to die.

They want less healthy young folks to have cardiac inflammation, and there is ample scientific evidence that the mRNA vaccines pose a risk of this. If you weren’t biased, you would review the data yourself and post a thorough analysis either refuting or confirming.

There’s far more risk from actually getting Covid than from getting the mRNA vaccination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/flsurgeongen/status/1578515633159180289?s=46&t=WL_zrOTp0uvN8lrJuUecdw

Was Twitter in the right to delete this? I’m undecided as I don’t have a science background.

I dont think you have to have a science background to decide whether twitter should censor the FL surgeon general.

Science changes. Thats the whole point of scientific research. To test and validate what we know, while making discoveries to enhance our knowledge. Twitter is anti science because they oppose the discussion and inquiry necessary to improve our body of knowledge.

I’m sure Twitter acted after it heard from legit scientists and experts that the FLSG’s post was dangerous disinformation. The SG is not interested in a good faith discussion.

You're "sure"?
I assume you're not a scientist.
Facts matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://twitter.com/flsurgeongen/status/1578515633159180289?s=46&t=WL_zrOTp0uvN8lrJuUecdw

Was Twitter in the right to delete this? I’m undecided as I don’t have a science background.

I dont think you have to have a science background to decide whether twitter should censor the FL surgeon general.

Science changes. Thats the whole point of scientific research. To test and validate what we know, while making discoveries to enhance our knowledge. Twitter is anti science because they oppose the discussion and inquiry necessary to improve our body of knowledge.

I’m sure Twitter acted after it heard from legit scientists and experts that the FLSG’s post was dangerous disinformation. The SG is not interested in a good faith discussion.

Would you consider a MD / PHD from Harvard University a “non legit” scientist? And would you consider a remote worker at Twitter who monitors posts for a living more credentialed than him to analyze scientific literature?

Scott Atlas was a clown.

[Anonymous]

It’s not peer reviewed. Let’s start there.
Citation to follow from me in 3 minutes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s like Florida wants more of its citizens to die.

They want less healthy young folks to have cardiac inflammation, and there is ample scientific evidence that the mRNA vaccines pose a risk of this. If you weren’t biased, you would review the data yourself and post a thorough analysis either refuting or confirming.

They don’t care.

Perhaps read the blog post (written by an MD/PhD) before spouting off.

At every turn of covid, DeSantis showed that he wanted maximum death. Why? Who knows. Proving a point in his own mind, perhaps? Trying to kill Democrats? Who knows. But no one should be giving him or any clown associated with him any benefit of the doubt. It’s unearned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many stories out there about heart issues, yet the complicit media and dcum ignore.

Millions more stories out there about COVID-19 issues, yet the dunderheaded Republicans continue to bark up the wrong tree.

+1

Who cares if original brand covid effectively turned blood to glue, it’s just a cold! Lotta Republicans with “just a cold” ran to the medical community for help at the first sign of insufficient oxygen.

[Anonymous]

Design
The self-controlled case series (SCCS) method adapted to evaluate death as the outcome was used.1,2 The SCCS method, originally developed to assess vaccine safety, utilizes within-person comparisons to estimate the temporal association between a transient exposure and an acute event.1 The SCCS method estimates relative incidence (RI) by comparing incidence during a defined high-risk period following exposure with incidence during a control period (i.e., all time in the follow-up period that is not the risk period).1–4 A major strength of the SCCS method is that fixed-time confounders, such as health related risk-factors, are controlled for.1,3
The primary analysis utilized the SCCS method developed for single exposures that cannot be repeated.1,3,4 Since mRNA vaccinations require a multidose schedule, a simple modification was employed, where the last vaccination preceding death was used as the single exposure.2 In this method, the within-individual comparison is between the immediate post-exposure period and later post- exposure periods.3
Data sources
Data from Florida’s reportable disease repository (Merlin), Florida State Health Online Tracking System



You will see that this is not a Randomized Control Trial, which is the gold standard of scientific trials. Next I’ll show you no scientific peers (at least none of the usual choices? Rand Paul for instance would not count) have reviewed the study or the conclusions the guy reached. Which are pretty different conclusions from the mainstream, which are therefore to be scrutinized before you announce a need to change how everyone is doing things.

Covid infection is not good for the heart. The vaccine’s effect on the heart? Jury is still out.

[Anonymous]

Trash “science” for armchair experts who believe they are equipped to “do their own research.”