So, suppose someone doesn’t have any history of Guillaine Barre syndrome, gets shot up with a viral mRNA product, and manifests what appears to be GB, those interested in protecting Covid Inc will say it’s just coincidence.
If they test for preexisting GB and find any history, this will be cited as evidence of coincidence.
However, if one can take these populations:
1. Viral mRNA negative population
A. Those with no history of GB
B. Those with a history of GB
2. Viral mRNA positive population
A. Those with no history of GB
B. Those with a history of GB
3. Viral mRNA positive populations by number of doses
A. Those with no history of GB
B. Those with a history of GB
And compile the numbers in each category since 2015 (just to get to a pre-Covid year).
1. If there exist no statistically significant change between populations 1, 2, and 3 and within the subpopulations A, B:
Then one would have no evidence of a change coincident with the introduction of the viral mRNA products.
2. If there exists a statistically significant increase in GB in 2 and 3 over the period of time compared to 1, then you could say there’s probably something the population of 2 and 3 has in common that could predispose those of A to developing it and those of B to having a preexisting GB exacerbated.
3. If there exists in those of 2 and 3, but not in 1, a statistically significant increase in GB starting in 2021 and continuing to the present, then you could say that there was something in the viral mRNA products that, independently of anyone’s predisposition to GB, greatly increases their risk of developing it and if both A and B show an increase, then you’ll be able to say that there’s something in the products that can both initiate something that appears to be GB as well as exacerbate an existing case of GB that antedates 2021.
3. If, in addition, amongst those of condition 3 with increasing number of doses of the viral mRNA show a statistically significant increase in GB codistributing with their number of doses, then you can say that,
whatever it is in the products doing it, it’s not by chance,
that it’s caused by something in the product, and
that repeated doses do not start the GB from an initial count but exacerbate existing GB conditions at stage.
What could cause an increase in GB and a variety of other conditions?
If you have a product that can cause multisystemic innate immune inflammatory attacks, then it’s bound to mess certain things up (based on initial conditions) more than others such that some could conclude (incorrectly) that someone is experiencing one or another autoimmune condition.
And if someone already has something classified as an autoimmune condition, then receiving a product that indiscriminately causes innate immune inflammatory attacks will exacerbate that preexisting condition.
Do the viral mRNA products have a primary mechanism of action that indiscriminately causes across multiple organ systems innate immune inflammatory attack and damage?
Yes. Their inherent design makes that inevitable.
If the product-free population shows no change in frequency of acquiring GB and no increase in severity of GB across 2015 to present, then one can conclude it’s because of something they do not share—which is exposure to viral mRNA products.
_________
Don’t you just love how the promoters dance around the facts to say coalition is not causation. They are trying to get people to accept that you can’t prove a negative with positive evidence!