The common argument for why there are so many adverse events for the COVID shot is, "Well, of course, there will be a ton of adverse events because we've never given so many vaccines to so many people at the same time."
While partially true, Stephanie Seneff debunks that claim by comparing it to another injection with high yearly uptake, the flu shot.
"Yes, that's true [that the COVID jab was administered on a wide scale], but it wouldn't be 98% [of all shots given in contrast to what we see with adverse events].
And in fact, we calculated it because you could get the numbers on what on the uptake of the flu shot, and it was over 50% of the population gets the flu shot every year. We got the numbers. We looked at that one shot, two shots, three shots, added them all up, and we got the ratio of the number of shots of COVID delivered in people's arms, including multiple shots in one person, versus the number of shots delivered in the arms of people for the flu shot.
And the ratio of the number of shots versus the ratio of the number of events. In other words, there are many more events [in the COVID jab] than you would expect if it was comparable. Even after accounting for the excess frequency, and we put that into our paper, the number was 27. 27 [adverse event] reports for COVID shots for every one report for a flu shot, normalized by the frequency. [The COVID jab is] 27 times as bad as the flu shot."
Well... there goes that argument for the pro-jab crowd. Great job, as always, Dr. Stephanie Seneff.
Follow the link to watch the entirety of this remarkable interview.
Argument Debunked: You Cannot Defend This Onslaught of Adverse Events from the COVID Jab