1974 replies to this topic

[Daniel Cooper]

I guess you have limited knowledge in regards to our corrupt oligarchy that has no problem killing people for profit. And, I guess you didn’t read my post containing the link to the Dr. Mercola article “WHO Puts Mad Scientist in Charge of Global Health”, https://media.mercol...-health-pdf.pdf, where it says:
 
*snip*
Study: Hemp compounds may help prevent, treat COVID-19[/size]Study: Hemp compounds may help prevent, treat COVID-19[/size]

 
And I guess you didn't read the notice that this thread will be more closely moderated going forward. We're not going to be taken off topic with discussions of the oligarchy, the military-industrial complex, bio-surveillance or AI brain implants unless you have an evidence based tie-in to the covid vaccines.
 
The nature of your post is overwhelmingly political. We have a political forum here. You are free to post content of this nature in that forum.
 
Your off topic post has been deleted.

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 10 February 2023 - 11:59 PM.

[pamojja]

I don't think people are really using the rating system to say that scientific papers are "pointless and time wasting". What's happened is that the rating system has become a means to convey "I don't like this poster" or "I don't like what this poster is saying", which is not what the rating system should be used for and it does tend to bring the tone of the discussion down across the board.

 

This is a completely inapprobiate general accusation of members, even by a moderator!

 

One very well finds enough posts of Hip without negative rating. Which only mean that forum members don't down vote because one 'doesn't like the poster', but most fitting rating for the content of a post.

 

Personal attacks are always 'unfriendly', or 'pointless'. Most of the time one doesn't see such ratings on any posts of Hip, which don't contain personal attacks.

 

To imply the rater by proper rating of the posted content would bring the tone down, is like saying not a criminal, but juritical system does. If this forum would be hosted in the EU, I sure would report Hip for his ceaseless hate-speech here.

 

If I were king I might think about getting rid of the ratings system entirely or maybe try to implement a limit where a user gets to award a relatively small number of ratings (maybe 2-3) per day. That way people might put a bit more thought into how they use it.

 

There exist already today a limit on daily rating (as found out after a 48 hrs intercontinental journey, and unable to rate each personal attack of Hip). Interesstingly none on number of posts with personal attacks.

 

However, I personally too think the Rating system here could be improved greatly: Only posters who have earned positive ratings are able to rate at an exchange rate of a quarter of a positive owned rating. A given positive rating would earn an eight of a full positve one. That way also gets ensured, deserving posts to get good ratings.

 

 

[Daniel Cooper]

This is a completely inapprobiate general accusation of members, even by a moderator!

 

You seem to mistakenly think that my comment was directed at you. My observation was a general one made over a number of years that I do think that the rating system is sometimes used inappropriately. It was directed at no one specifically and certainly not directed at you.

 

It was specifically a response to an observation by another member about posts with links to published scientific papers that were labeled "Pointless, Time Wasting".

 

Let's all cool down shall we.

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 11 February 2023 - 05:26 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

What someone does on other forums is not relevant to this forum. We do not need to import drama from other sites.

 

Hip will not be posting on the site for some time so please do not direct comments towards him as he will not be able to respond.

 

 

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 11 February 2023 - 06:14 PM.

[geo12the]

When links to scientific papers are consistently marked as "pointless and time wasting" it's a clue that whomever is doing that doesn't care about science and only wants to maintain their preconceived notions.

 

 

 

At some level, when I see that, and it happens frequently when I post links to papers, I think it could also signify that a nerve has been touched. Truth and reality has poked through to some people and their knee-jerk response is: Pointless and time wasting!  What did the robot used say in Lost in space: Danger Will Robinson!

[william7]

Jab 2.0 for Humanity 2.0 – Hurtling Down the AI-to-Vaxx Pipeline

Big Pharma embraces the Fourth Industrial Revolution—“the fusion of our physical, digital, and biological identities”

 

By Joe Allen

 

Artificial intelligence is pulling new vaccines out of the Platonic realm. Automated labs are on standby, prepared to crank out alien strands of mRNA and pack them into toxic nanoparticles. A billion empty syringes are waiting on shelves. 

This is not science fiction. These jabs will be on the market before you can say “boostah.”

Google. Moderna. Microsoft. They’re all racing to the edge. This is corporate transhumanism in all its avaricious glory, riding waves of propaganda and channeled by the biosecurity state.

These people uphold a new mythos whose axis mundi is the Machine. In their world, digital minds are “dreaming up” novel genetic configurations. Biological systems are treated as “living software.” With each technical advance, their myths bleed into our reality.

A 2019 white paper from Policy Horizons Canada describes this shift as a “biodigital convergence,” characterized by:
1 – Full physical integration of biological and digital entities
2 – Coevolution of biological and digital entities

3 – Conceptual convergence of biological and digital systems

Our intelligentsia—the elites “educated beyond their level of intelligence”—are undergoing a sort of religious conversion. Their world has been illuminated by gene sequencing and neural networks. 

Their machines have convinced them that living things are just clunky machines. Our immune systems require software updates. Our flawed genomes need debugging. In order to get there, our brains must be augmented.

“Reality explored by AI, or with the assistance of AI, may prove to be something other than what humans had imagined,” wrote ex-Google chief Eric Schmidt in his 2021 book The Age of AI. “Across the biological, chemical, and physical sciences, a hybrid partnership is emerging in which AI is enabling new discoveries.”

 

For the full article see https://joebot.subst...eader<em>2</em>

[Mind]

There have been a lot of peer-reviewed studies indicating the strong natural (normal) immunity that develops in people after getting COVID. They have been posted throughout this discussion, but for those just joining, they might be unaware of the weight of the evidence.

 

Here is one paper that indicated natural immunity was 13 times better at preventing an infection with the delta variant than the mRNA injections.

 

__________________________

 

In a recent Q&A about the COVID injections, CDC director Walensky was appalled that childhood vaccination rates are falling in the U.S. (and many other countries). I would say that the CDC has no one to blame except themselves. It isn't because of "misinformation" or "disinformation", or "anti-vax conspiracy nuts". It is because everyone who got the shots got COVID anyway. It is because there are a lot of bad side effects. It is because more children who got the injections are dying than kids who did not get the injections (according to recent government data out of the UK). Parents talk to each other. They know these things are happening.

 

I am unaware of any country besides the U.S. that is sticking by the policy of forcing every child (down to toddlers) to get the COVID injections. Parents remember all of vitriol that was hurled at them when they took a wait-and-see approach. U.S. media and social media (egged on by the CDC and the federal government in general) were saying things like "lock up the parents!", "take their kids away", and "send them away to re-education camps". It is no wonder why a majority of people in the U.S. are now skeptical of the vaccine industry in general.

Edited by Mind, 15 February 2023 - 09:51 PM.

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Re: post 907

 

Actually, the headline of your first link, Mind, claims up to 137 times, not 13 times. And, it says "likely to die", not "preventing an infection". But, the really interesting part is that 137 is the approximate inverse of the fine structure constant.

 

Ok, I see there was a change in the original link after my post. So, ignore everything I wrote except for the fact that 137 is the approximate inverse of the fine structure constant.

 

Here is the original first link in Mind's post. Why doesn't his post show an edit was performed, if that's what happened?

Edited by Advocatus Diaboli, 11 February 2023 - 10:23 PM.

[william7]

There have been a lot of peer-reviewed studies indicating the strong natural (normal) immunity that develops in people after getting COVID. They have been posted throughout this discussion, but for those just joining, they might be unaware of the weight of the evidence.

 

Here is one paper that indicated natural immunity was 13 times better at preventing an infection with the delta variant than the mRNA injections.

 

__________________________and "

 

In a recent Q&A about the COVID injections, CDC director Walensky was appalled that childhood vaccination rates are falling in the U.S. (and many other countries). I would say that the CDC has no one to blame except themselves. It isn't because of "misinformation" or "disinformation", or "anti-vax conspiracy nuts". It is because everyone who got the shots got COVID anyway. It is because there are a lot of bad side effects. It is because more children who got the injections are dying than kids who did not get the injections (according to recent government data out of the UK). Parents talk to each other. They know these things are happening.

 

I am unaware of any country besides the U.S. that is sticking by the policy of forcing every child (down to toddlers) to get the COVID injections. Parents remember all of vitriol that was hurled at them when they took a wait-and-see approach. U.S. media and social media (egged on by the CDC and the federal government in general) were saying thing like "lock up the parents!", "take their kids away", and "send them away to re-education camps". It is no wonder why a majority of people in the U.S. are now skeptical of the vaccine industry in general.

To add to that Jimmy Dore says that “Fauci, CDC & FDA Conspired To Lie About Natural Immunity.”

 

https://youtu.be/gS-rjdqdLGY

[Mind]

Just a few follow-ups on points made earlier in this discussion

 

* The COVID injection stays in your arm *

 

This is false according to hundreds of autopsy reports. At least some of the COVID injection ends up in every organ of the body.

 

____________________

 

There has been discussion about myocarditis rates recently. Arguments have been made that it is because of suffering through COVID vs. it because of the COVID injections. Here is some recent data again showing a tight temporal correlation between the rise in myocarditis and the rise in COVID injections. This is not definitive proof but it certainly looks suspicious.

 

Maybe people are not getting the latest boosters because they are quietly talking about the side effects between themselves. The COVID injections/boosters are not being used by hardly anyone in the world at this point. Leading health bureaucrats are worried about this. They have been saying how dangerous this is for a few months now - but society seems to be functioning just fine.

 

___________________________

 

This has been pointed out previously, but since when did the FDA get into the racket of promoting the substances they are supposed to be regulating. I cannot think of another product that the FDA actively promotes. Could you imagine them promoting any other therapeutic?

 

______________________

 

People were labelled as crack-pot conspiracy nuts for suggesting that the COVID injections would be used as a form of control, but the government tracking of the unvaccinated is rapidly going mainstream, promoted by the WHO and CDC, of course. In the U.S. this is illegal under the constitution - not sure why this is being allowed or even considered.

Edited by Mind, 16 February 2023 - 10:27 PM.

[Advocatus Diaboli]

I see that Mind's post #907 now indicates that an edit was performed: "Edited by Mind, Today, 01:51 PM.". Some readers might gloss over the date of the edit-notice, and wonder WTF I was talking about in my post #908.

Mind, how is it that you are able to edit a post, #907, today (2/15/2023, as I write this) which you originally posted on 2/11/2023 (post #907: "Posted 11 February 2023 - 01:06 PM")--3 non-inclusive days, ago? I don't seem to have an equal ability, as there is no "Edit" option for me to click for my post #908 at this late stage.

The original change (the modified hyperlink) to your post #907 was not accompanied with an "Edited by" disclaimer at the bottom of the post--which I pointed out in my post #908.

Is Hanlon's razor operant in this case? Or is there a reasonable explanation why some posters (you, e.g.) are essentially "more equal" than others regarding your displayed type of editing--i.e. editing, without "Edited by" notification, and which doesn't fall within the ambit of legitimate Moderator-type editing (e.g., extreme personal attacks, etc.)?

I think it's important for readers to know if the posts being read, and replied to, contain the original content that readers are, well, reading and replying to. And, that readers are made aware of any edits made--no matter by whom.

 

[Mind]

This is off-topic, but it is important to note here. Thanks for raising the issue Advocatus Diaboli.

 

Yes, moderators and "members" have enhanced editing capabilities (a member benefit). As a member you can also create and moderate discussions you start.

 

I apologize for any confusion that previous edits might have caused in this discussion. I usually only edit grammatical and spelling errors. I rarely go back and edit the content of any of my posts, but rather prefer a new post to clarify thoughts or post new info/links.

 

For any further discussion about membership and editing, please start a new discussion in the Forum Issues subforum.

[smithx]

A new vaccine produced the same way that influenza vaccines are produced:

 

https://www.science....anslmed.abo2847

 

NDV-HXP-S is a recombinant Newcastle disease virus–based vaccine against SARS-CoV-2, which expresses an optimized (HexaPro) spike protein on its surface. The vaccine can be produced in embryonated chicken eggs using the same process as that used for the production of the vast majority of influenza virus vaccines. Here, we performed a secondary analysis of the antibody responses after vaccination with inactivated NDV-HXP-S in a phase 1 clinical study in Thailand. The SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing and spike protein binding activity of NDV-HXP-S postvaccination serum samples was compared to that of samples from mRNA BNT162b2 (Pfizer) vaccinees. Neutralizing activity of sera from NDV-HXP-S vaccinees was comparable to that of BNT162b2 vaccinees, whereas spike protein binding activity of the NDV-HXP-S vaccinee samples was lower than that of sera obtained from mRNA vaccinees. This led us to calculate ratios between binding and neutralizing antibody titers. Samples from NDV-HXP-S vaccinees had binding to neutralizing activity ratios that were lower than those of BNT162b2 sera, suggesting that NDV-HXP-S vaccination elicits a high proportion of neutralizing antibodies and low non-neutralizing antibody titers. Further analysis showed that, in contrast to mRNA vaccination, which induces strong antibody titers to the receptor binding domain (RBD), the N-terminal domain, and the S2 domain, NDV-HXP-S vaccination induced an RBD-focused antibody response with little reactivity to S2. This finding may explain the high proportion of neutralizing antibodies. In conclusion, vaccination with inactivated NDV-HXP-S induces a high proportion of neutralizing antibodies and absolute neutralizing antibody titers that are comparable to those elicited by mRNA vaccination.

 

[healthmysteries31]

another meta-analysis about covid immunity was just published. They looked at 65 studies and found that while previous infection did not protect against re-infection very well(efficacy around 40% after 40 weeks) the protection against severe disease was very strong (around 90% after 40 weeks) for all variants.

 

 

Interpretation

Protection from past infection against re-infection from pre-omicron variants was very high and remained high even after 40 weeks. Protection was substantially lower for the omicron BA.1 variant and declined more rapidly over time than protection against previous variants. Protection from severe disease was high for all variants.

 

 

 

https://www.thelance...2465-5/fulltext

 

IMO that should end any debate about natural immunity not existing against covid.  Obviously it does otherwise we would have been killed by common-cold viruses long time ago.

Edited by healthmysteries31, 17 February 2023 - 07:06 AM.

[Daniel Cooper]

another meta-analysis about covid immunity was just published. They looked at 65 studies and found that while previous infection did not protect against re-infection very well(efficacy around 40% after 40 weeks) the protection against severe disease was very strong (around 90% after 40 weeks) for all variants.

 

 

 

 

https://www.thelance...2465-5/fulltext

 

IMO that should end any debate about natural immunity not existing against covid.  Obviously it does otherwise we would have been killed by common-cold viruses long time ago.

 

The argument that vaccines confer some level of immunity while actual infection does not has never made any sense. They both work through the same mechanisms. And while the current vaccines only expose the immune system to a single aspect of the virus (i.e. the spike protein), actual infection obviously exposes the immune system to the entire virus so likely builds a more broad based immunity to multiple aspects.  Infection should generate more robust immunity. The argument against it is if you're in a vulnerable demographic it might also cause serious illness up to and including death.

 

However, as the virus has become less lethal the argument for the vaccine has diminished for those without significant comorbidities.

[Mind]

The argument that vaccines confer some level of immunity while actual infection does not has never made any sense. They both work through the same mechanisms. And while the current vaccines only expose the immune system to a single aspect of the virus (i.e. the spike protein), actual infection obviously exposes the immune system to the entire virus so likely builds a more broad based immunity to multiple aspects.  Infection should generate more robust immunity. The argument against it is if you're in a vulnerable demographic it might also cause serious illness up to and including death.

 

However, as the virus has become less lethal the argument for the vaccine has diminished for those without significant comorbidities.

 

"Never made any sense" is a relatively mild way to describe it. Bizarre, unscientific, and irrational come closer. Saying "there is no natural immunity to COVID" was not even a logical stance to start with considering what is known about viruses and the immune system overall, but even more specifically with regards to coronaviruses - which had been studied for DECADES!! Yet we had to endure the insults from the COVID rage mob over this.

 

It makes zero sense unless....

 

It was created to evade natural immunity. Maybe there is a reason why Dr. Fauci and people surrounding Google-funded Ecohealth, who funded the creation of Sars-CoV2 were so adamant that natural immunity was non-existent. It is worth at least pondering.

 

More likely it is a classic case of regulatory capture where the FDA and CDC are on the side of big-pharma, not the people. Here is some of the behind the scenes with Dr. Fauci and other public "health" bureaucrats where they plot to deny natural immunity. The reason: because previously infected people were arguing they should be exempt from the vax mandates.

 

_________________________

 

Another myth is that of COVID-heart illness/myocarditis. Another paper has been "corrected" regarding the COVID illness-myocarditis link. The authors still claim there is an association and they stand by their conclusion, but the paper is much less compelling, and their data is very short term. Vast data and other research suggests there is very little connection between heart ailments and COVID illness, this was even known last year. Most of the data, autopsies, and papers suggest the rise in heart ailments is due to the COVID injections.

 

The COVID injection side effects are probably more than we are being told, considering the CDC's history of lying and hiding of information. A recent investigation of the VAERS database finds a lot of errors and missing data.

 

Other public "health" agencies around the world are also trying to hide data. After NSW Australia released data at the end of 2022 which showed almost no unvaccinated people were ending up in the hospital or dying, they made the decision to stop sharing data publicly.

 

 

 

“Vaccination status of cases admitted to hospital, admitted to ICU and those who die will no longer be reported.”

 

So much for transparency from the government. How awful.

Edited by Mind, 18 February 2023 - 02:57 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

So much for transparency from the government. How awful.

 

Most governments have never been super enthusiastic about transparency. Particularly when such transparency might reveal government mistakes or corruption.

 

 

[Daniel Cooper]

A new vaccine produced the same way that influenza vaccines are produced:

 

https://www.science....anslmed.abo2847

 

Very glad to see this news.

 

Of course, I have to ask the question - why did we pursue and approve a very novel vaccine technique which had never been approved by the FDA previously initially instead of doing something like this from the get-go?

 

Also another question I asked in another response in regards to new covid vaccines - Will this be approved under a new EUA or will it go through the normal FDA approval process?

 

If it goes through the normal process - even an accelerated version of the normal process - I don't see this hitting the market for 3 years.  If the covid-19 virus continues to moderate and natural immunity continues to build - is anyone going to care about a new covid vaccine in 3 years? On a widescale deployment basis I think the answer to that is no. People aren't getting the boosters today when the peak of the pandemic is a recent memory. It's hard to imagine they will be clamoring to line up for a new vaccine in 2025.

 

If they try to go the EUA route - how will that be justified given that the Biden administration has stated they will allow the Emergency Declaration established for the pandemic to expire in two months (May 11th)?

 

I suppose it might be viable on a limited deployment basis - for the elderly or those with significant comorbidities. And it will be good to have in the toolbox should things take a turn for the worse. I just don't see the public demanding a new vaccine in the current situation much less at some future date if things continue to improve as they should.  I think the public is going to be much more leery of potential side effects from another vaccine - rightly or wrongly depending on your point of view - but I think the reluctance to take another shot will be significant. That is likely just the reality of the situation.

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 18 February 2023 - 12:30 AM.

[Gal220]

Welt reporting from Germany

 

https://twitter.com/...633590736814089

https://twitter.com/...633590736814089

 

"NEW - Biontech/Pfizer's mRNA vaccine approval may have been based on incorrect documentation, WELT reports. There are increasing doubts about the data from the pivotal phase 3 study. Pfizer dodges the allegations and refuses a review."

 

"EMA e-mails obtained by WELT reveal that the FDA, the British MHRA, and the EMA had already agreed on the timing of the approval [of the vaccines] before they even had a chance to look at the Pfizer documents."

[Gal220]

Informed consent is back in FL, little late...

 

I mean, couldnt this conclusion have been reached sometime before everyone took a few boosters?

 

 

"Florida tells doctors to warn patients they could suffer HEART ATTACK after Covid shot"

 

 

Nice to see the UK covering it, still "controversial" though, despite all the excess death

https://www.dailymai...Covid-shot.html

[Mind]

Recent excess death in Germany is 44% higher than expected. If this was 2020, the media would be all over it and claiming that we are all going to die of COVID. Now the media doesn't even asks questions about why so many people are dying unexpectedly.

[Mind]

I recall when the Pfizer trial data was released and it showed nearly 3% of the people in the trial died and there were tens of thousands of reported adverse events from hundreds of different health conditions...our "health" leaders and COVID rage mob said "nothing to see here, move along now", in addition to the normal insults.

 

More and more real world data confirms what was found in the trial data. Here a Japanese study finds an increase in Grave's disease and thyroid autoimmunity conditions. I would speculate, like many others, that because the COVID injections spreads throughout the body (it doesn't "stay in your arm"), it is causing autoimmunity problems in various organs. Thankfully, most of the people I know who took the COVID injections are still doing okay, less than 10 percent of them have reported adverse events. 

 

Some have speculated that variation in the injection process might be causing variation in the severity of adverse events. A deeper needle stick is more likely to find a vein or artery, allowing the COVID injection to spread more easily throughout the body. I suppose that is worth considering,

[geo12the]

I recall when the Pfizer trial data was released and it showed nearly 3% of the people in the trial died and there were tens of thousands of reported adverse events from hundreds of different health conditions...our "health" leaders and COVID rage mob said "nothing to see here, move along now", in addition to the normal insults.

 

 

"3% of the people in the trial died" this is nonsense and you know it.   How can you expect to have good faith discussions with people when you constantly distort facts?

[geo12the]

This paper suggests that the updated vaccines work better:

 

A Randomized Trial Comparing Omicron-Containing Boosters with the Original Covid-19 Vaccine mRNA-1273

 

"Conclusion The bivalent omicron BA.1 containing booster elicited superior neutralizing antibody responses against omicron BA.1 with acceptable safety results consistent with the BA.1 monovalent vaccine. Incidence rates for Covid-19 were numerically lower in participants who received mRNA-1273.214 compared to the original booster vaccine mRNA-1273, driven by the BA.2 and BA.4 sublineages."

[Mind]

"3% of the people in the trial died" this is nonsense and you know it.   How can you expect to have good faith discussions with people when you constantly distort facts?

 

Here is the Pfizer trial document once again. They had over 42,000 people with adverse events and over 1,200 of them died, which is nearly 3%.

 

In other news,

 

Dr. Thomas notes that recent SIDS cases are all happening after getting the COVID injections, not before.

 

The Novavax has an association with increased heart problems as well.

 

Long COVID is exaggerated based upon "studies" that have so many methodological problems they should be retracted.

 

One positive aspects of the COVID rage mob (and the UN) trying to destroy anyone who asks questions is that people are now asking more questions, including about the history of the vaccine industry, the effectiveness of vaccines, and their side effects (vaccinated children have higher rates of eczema, gastrointestinal disorders, and asthma, in addition to having more developmental problems.)

 

Take a look at the history of other drugs with problems - it typically takes years or decades of advocacy before the government turns around and acknowledges how many people were harmed or killed.

[geo12the]

Here is the Pfizer trial document once again. They had over 42,000 people with adverse events and over 1,200 of them died, which is nearly 3%.

 

 

 

This document is incomplete. there is no control group and you are taking the data out of context. Your state it to suggest that 3% of people who are vaccinated die. This is simply not true. If you were more honest with how you present things I would be more willing to take you more seriously. You rail against "exaggerations" about long COVID (which is real and nasty BTW) yet all you do is exaggerate and twist facts to suit your world view. I just don't undertsand.

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Re post #926

 

geo12the states: "Your (sic) state it to suggest that 3% of people who are vaccinated die."

 

Is Mind actually overtly suggesting it, or is it the case that you are inferring it? Seems to me, that Mind is stating an objective fact, i.e.: "over 1,200 of them died, which is nearly 3%.". when referring to the Pfizer data. He makes no overt insinuation. It is you that are drawing an inference-of-motive apparently based upon your own subjective reasoning. Mind's assertion, as written--not as interpreted via straw man--is correct.

[Mind]

This document is incomplete. there is no control group and you are taking the data out of context. Your state it to suggest that 3% of people who are vaccinated die. This is simply not true. If you were more honest with how you present things I would be more willing to take you more seriously. You rail against "exaggerations" about long COVID (which is real and nasty BTW) yet all you do is exaggerate and twist facts to suit your world view. I just don't undertsand.

 

There were over 42,000 case reports during the Pfizer trial and over 1,200 of those people died. No one disputes this, except you, I think. 

 

If I mistakenly gave the impression that 3% of ALL the trial participants died, that is in error, because the total death toll is unknown, it could be a lesser or greater percentage than 3% because if you look closely there were 9,400 case reports where the end result was "unknown". Who are these people? Did they die? We had whistleblowers providing evidence that the Pfizer trial was sloppy and fraudulent (documentation published in BMJ). 9,400 unknown - with no follow-up - is the definition of a "sloppy" trial.

 

Anyone can peruse the Pfizer trial documentation. It is public. Just looking at the neurological adverse events, we find 542 events among 501 people with 95% of those being labeled as serious neurological problems, including multiple sclerosis, and seizures. Tens of thousands of people in the U.S. alone have reported serious neurological effects from the COVID injections. Many people developed persistent seizures and paralysis (including Eric Clapton). So sad to see them mocked and ridiculed. The COVID rage mob says they are faking it. So heart-breaking.

 

I cannot think of a single therapeutic in the past that had so many severe adverse events when over 1,200 people died during trial, that was ever approved. If anyone can find one, I would like to see it.

Edited by Mind, 21 February 2023 - 06:54 PM.

[Gal220]

More criminal behavior from our health agencies

 

https://twitter.com/...241406354419716

ICAN report

“We audited 126 of our injured that submitted to VAERS.  

-5% never made it to VAERS

-22% made it to VAERS but not publicly viewable

-15% were outright deleted.  

 

Most of the deleted ones were severe injuries”

 

 

The whole idea behind VAERs is transparency, or so we thought

[Gal220]

ONS data drop from UK, mortality by vaccination status.  Many people discussing

 

 

https://usmortality....fficacy-against

 

https://twitter.com/...430049295597570

 

https://igorchudov.s...-among/comments

 

https://usmortality....e=twitter&sd=pf