Alright. NOW it's crossed the damned line.
Covid Vaccine
- Thread starter jitter77
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2014
- Messages
- 14,590
- Reaction score
- 16,953
- Points
- 113
That's the last place I'd want to get vaccinated. Those Covidians sure are a strange bunch.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 9,016
- Reaction score
- 11,676
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 9,016
- Reaction score
- 11,676
- Points
- 113
Not sure if it is true, wish it was. Also not sure if I believe this fact check or your source
More evidence of our governments intentionally deceiving us.
Given this increasing resistance against the vaccine programme, the official messaging was changed from “vaccines stop you getting covid” to “vaccines stop you being hospitalised and dying from covid”.
To push this new narrative the Government started pumping out ‘data’ to support the claim that almost all of those ill in hospital with covid were unvaccinated. Here is an NHS text that was sent to everybody registered with a GP in the UK in November 2021:
This creates a false semantic equivalence between ‘unvaccinated’ and ‘not fully vaccinated’.
Many media sources, including the BBC, pushed the 80% unvaccinated claim without even mentioning the ‘fully vaccinated’ criteria:
and this one in the Guardian:
With respect to patients in ICU claims that high proportions of those with covid were unvaccinated were widely cited - and never challenged - in the mainstream media:
Ludicrous unverifiable claims pushed as facts
A particularly serious example was the ludicrous claim made in the BBC documentary “Unvaccinated” by Dr Mehool Patel (Consultant, University Hospital Lewisham). His statement - unchallenged in the programme - was:
This was one of the many specific pieces of misinformation that I raised in my formal complaint to the BBC about the programme. I asked the BBC to provide the verified data to support this claim. When I eventually received a response from the BBC’s Complaints Director Jeremy Hayes he said:
To be continued....
Claims the unvaccinated were at higher risk of hospitalisation and death were based on deliberately murky record keeping
Again, another statistical illusion of efficacy was manufactured by simple miscategorisation
Switching narrative to counter vaccine ‘hesitancy’
By late 2021 it was already clear in the UK that the covid vaccines did not stop infection or transmission. And there were also already plenty of concerning safety signals. So, even though the “vaccine pass” was then required in the UK to participate in daily life, ‘vaccine hesitancy’ was on the increase.Given this increasing resistance against the vaccine programme, the official messaging was changed from “vaccines stop you getting covid” to “vaccines stop you being hospitalised and dying from covid”.
To push this new narrative the Government started pumping out ‘data’ to support the claim that almost all of those ill in hospital with covid were unvaccinated. Here is an NHS text that was sent to everybody registered with a GP in the UK in November 2021:
Vast majority of those vaccinated were not “fully vaccinated”
At the time the text was sent out, “fully vaccinated” in the UK was defined as: “at least 14 days since 3rd jab” or “between at least 14 days and less than 6 months of 2nd jab”. So, the official figure of 8 out of 10 “not fully vaccinated” might have been right but was totally misleading since almost ALL of those who were vaccinated (i.e., had at least one jab) at that time were “not fully vaccinated”.This creates a false semantic equivalence between ‘unvaccinated’ and ‘not fully vaccinated’.
Many media sources, including the BBC, pushed the 80% unvaccinated claim without even mentioning the ‘fully vaccinated’ criteria:
Claims for covid deaths and patients in ICUs
Similar claims were made about covid deaths among the vaccinated such as this one in the Independent:
and this one in the Guardian:
With respect to patients in ICU claims that high proportions of those with covid were unvaccinated were widely cited - and never challenged - in the mainstream media:
Ludicrous unverifiable claims pushed as facts
A particularly serious example was the ludicrous claim made in the BBC documentary “Unvaccinated” by Dr Mehool Patel (Consultant, University Hospital Lewisham). His statement - unchallenged in the programme - was:
This was one of the many specific pieces of misinformation that I raised in my formal complaint to the BBC about the programme. I asked the BBC to provide the verified data to support this claim. When I eventually received a response from the BBC’s Complaints Director Jeremy Hayes he said:
To be continued....
Continued...
As a result of Freedom of Information Requests sent to some individual NHS trusts we now know that some hospitals were using the NIMS system to classify vaccine status of patients while others were using their own systems. This meant that, in many cases even if a patient had a vaccination record in NIMS, if the patient was not vaccinated in that particular hospital/Trust they were recorded as unvaccinated. Some hospitals were using a mixture of both systems (NIMS where a death was recorded and an internal system where a covid case was recorded). For those relying on NIMS, since it was not operational until June 2021, all deaths within the hospital would have had an unknown vaccination status between Jan-June 2021. The problem is that some hospitals were classifying “unknown” as “unvaccinated”.
So, deliberately murky record keeping was used to manipulate the data.
To see the implications of this, here are the data on hospital deaths (all deaths, not just covid) from the start of the vaccine programme until the end of 2021 from an undisclosed NHS trust who responded to an FOI request:
Note that every death up until 21 June 2021 was recorded as unvaccinated simply because hospitals in this Trust were using the NIMS system for classifying deaths which was not up and running until then. But, of course, an unknown number (probably most) of these 742 people were vaccinated.
There are plenty of other anomalies in the data. Note the improbable, sudden and dramatic trend changes:
It is easy to see how the Government could cherry pick this kind of data to present the narrative they wanted. When the text messages were being sent out in November 2021 it is reasonable to assume that they were using the cumulative data up to, say, mid-October. Then using the data in the table up to and including 18 Oct 2021 we count:
But this is all an illusion. In fact, counting just the final three weeks of the data (6-20 Dec), just 18 out of the 144 deaths (12.5%) were unvaccinated.
It is also worth noting that the same NHS Trust provided the following information on “new COVID positives” in its hospitals between 19th Jan 2021 and 19th Jan 2022.
Given what we know about national vaccination take-up rates, and this Trust’s own death data, it is likely that the majority of those classified as ‘unvaccinated’ here would have been vaccinated (with the exception of those in the 0-20 age categories the vast majority of whom would not have been eligible for vaccination).
So, instead of the ‘50% of new covid cases’ being among the unvaccinated - the ‘official’ narrative pushed from this data - the true narrative should have been that the vast majority of new covid cases were vaccinated.
The figures were also used as the basis for the bogus studies claiming millions of lives were saved by the vaccine.
So, yet again, we can see that statistical data was used to create an illusion of vaccine hospitalisation and mortality efficacy by the simplest of means: deliberately murky record keeping ensuring that the vaccinated get recategorized as unvaccinated when they die or are hospitalised.
Postscript: A commenter below reports that the USA “was far worse”:
Deliberately murky record keeping used to manipulate data
But the scam was based on something even more ludicrous than classifying “not fully vaccinated” as “unvaccinated”.As a result of Freedom of Information Requests sent to some individual NHS trusts we now know that some hospitals were using the NIMS system to classify vaccine status of patients while others were using their own systems. This meant that, in many cases even if a patient had a vaccination record in NIMS, if the patient was not vaccinated in that particular hospital/Trust they were recorded as unvaccinated. Some hospitals were using a mixture of both systems (NIMS where a death was recorded and an internal system where a covid case was recorded). For those relying on NIMS, since it was not operational until June 2021, all deaths within the hospital would have had an unknown vaccination status between Jan-June 2021. The problem is that some hospitals were classifying “unknown” as “unvaccinated”.
So, deliberately murky record keeping was used to manipulate the data.
To see the implications of this, here are the data on hospital deaths (all deaths, not just covid) from the start of the vaccine programme until the end of 2021 from an undisclosed NHS trust who responded to an FOI request:
Note that every death up until 21 June 2021 was recorded as unvaccinated simply because hospitals in this Trust were using the NIMS system for classifying deaths which was not up and running until then. But, of course, an unknown number (probably most) of these 742 people were vaccinated.
There are plenty of other anomalies in the data. Note the improbable, sudden and dramatic trend changes:
- A steady decline in “unvaccinated” deaths from 21 June until 13 Sept. In week ending 13 Sept only 4 out of 46 (less than 9%) were unvaccinated.
- The next week (20 Sept) the unvaccinated are suddenly the majority again with 21 out of 31 deaths (68%), and this increases so quickly that just 3 weeks later (11 Oct) all 44 deaths (100%) are ‘unvaccinated’.
- But then we get a sudden and rapid decline in the unvaccinated deaths. Just 2 weeks later (25 Oct) the unvaccinated are 13 out of 47 deaths (28%) and by 20 Dec none of 53 deaths (0%) were unvaccinated.
It is easy to see how the Government could cherry pick this kind of data to present the narrative they wanted. When the text messages were being sent out in November 2021 it is reasonable to assume that they were using the cumulative data up to, say, mid-October. Then using the data in the table up to and including 18 Oct 2021 we count:
- 1051 “unvaccinated” (including 17 with just a single jab)
- 370 “vaccinated” (with 2 jabs).
But this is all an illusion. In fact, counting just the final three weeks of the data (6-20 Dec), just 18 out of the 144 deaths (12.5%) were unvaccinated.
It is also worth noting that the same NHS Trust provided the following information on “new COVID positives” in its hospitals between 19th Jan 2021 and 19th Jan 2022.
Given what we know about national vaccination take-up rates, and this Trust’s own death data, it is likely that the majority of those classified as ‘unvaccinated’ here would have been vaccinated (with the exception of those in the 0-20 age categories the vast majority of whom would not have been eligible for vaccination).
So, instead of the ‘50% of new covid cases’ being among the unvaccinated - the ‘official’ narrative pushed from this data - the true narrative should have been that the vast majority of new covid cases were vaccinated.
Why does this matter?
It matters a lot because, despite being completely bogus, these kinds of ludicrous figures were so consistently repeated that the message “vaccines stop you being hospitalised and dying from covid (even if they don’t stop infection and transmission)” was almost universally accepted. Even the strongest critics of the Government’s covid response consistently repeated this mantra:
The figures were also used as the basis for the bogus studies claiming millions of lives were saved by the vaccine.
So, yet again, we can see that statistical data was used to create an illusion of vaccine hospitalisation and mortality efficacy by the simplest of means: deliberately murky record keeping ensuring that the vaccinated get recategorized as unvaccinated when they die or are hospitalised.
Postscript: A commenter below reports that the USA “was far worse”:
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 3,671
- Reaction score
- 6,889
- Points
- 113
If there is one thing that has come out of this whole thing, is that my mistrust in the people who are supposed to be leaders was emboldened 1000 fold. I will never trust them ever again. I simply cannot believe that people rolled over and showed their bellies so willingly. Any hope of having collective power of the people is dead.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 18,575
- Reaction score
- 29,902
- Points
- 113
- Location
- The nearest Steelers bar.
This information may belong here, related to "excess deaths." Seems Sweden had a high Covid death rate (almost universally attributed to its "laissez faire" attitude towards the Chinese flu and lockdowns), but now basically has the LOWEST rate of "excess deaths" overall.
Huh. No relationship at all, I'm sure.
Huh. No relationship at all, I'm sure.
Gov Newsome with the vid.....uhhhhgain.
Wow, just think how bad this could have been if he didn't have at least 2 boosters!
Good vibes for you and your Partner Unit as you prepare for your State of the State tour.
TERRIFIED OF DISCOVERY: MASSIVE IMPLICATIONS IN PFIZER WHISTLEBLOWER CASE
Whistleblower Plaintiff Brook Jackson and Defendants Pfizer, Ventavia, and ICON met in Judge Michael J. Truncale’s Beaumont, Texas, courtroom on March 1, 2023, to hear Pfizer’s motion to dismiss the False Claims Act case Jackson filed against the pharmaceutical giant on behalf of the United States. Depending on Truncale’s ruling, the case could further expose the enormous fraud and deception between Pfizer and the U.S. government as the billionaire company cut corners and wasted taxpayer money to get its experimental COVID-19 gene therapy jabs into the arms of society. While the world awaits Truncale’s ruling on whether the case will move forward with discovery or be dismissed altogether, as Pfizerhopes, Jackson’s attorney Robert Barnes summed up what is undoubtedly the belief held by any American paying attention, tweeting:
“Pfizer promised to deliver a safe, effective vaccine for prevention of COVID based on honest clinical data. Instead, they delivered a dangerous, ineffective gene therapy, preventing nothing. Pfizer lied. People died. Time for discovery.”
Judge Truncale, appointed in 2019, allowed nearly four hours of oral arguments last Wednesday in the case, which centers around revelations of shoddy practices at Ventavia, a contract research company hired to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal COVID-19 vaccine trial before the FDA’s issued its Emergency Use Authorization. Truncale noted that he would not issue a ruling from the bench. As of March 6, a decision has yet to be handed down, and according to Barnes, Truncale’s written opinion could take weeks or even months, depending on how long it takes the court to review the case. Barnes explained that the court expressed concern that the net effect of Pfizer’s argument could be “that there’s no role for the judiciary in overseeing what takes place if the FDA simply continues along with the Pfizer fraud.”
Trying to shift responsibility for any wrongdoing, Defense attorneys argued that even if protocol violations occurred, the case should not move forward because the federal government was aware “but still granted emergency authorization to Pfizer’s vaccine.” Racing to beat Moderna as the first pharmaceutical company to unveil an EUA mRNA injection, the billion-dollar company’s attorneys tried to minimize the magnitude of Jackson’s complaints, asserting that “even if rules were violated, the problems only affected a small number of trial sites.” Astounded by Pfizer’s defense, Barnes explained the company’s extraordinary arrogance and untouchable attitude—remember, they have special immunity thanks to the PREP Act—sharing with Owen Shroyer:
“Pfizer’s defense was not that these allegations are false. They challenge whether the allegations are true, but at this stage of the pleadings, they have to assume them to be true legally. Their argument was solely that even if they created a dangerous, ineffective drug that they disguised as a vaccine that they said would be for the prevention of COVID-19, that didn’t prevent COVID at all—in fact, in some cases, it appears the infection rate goes up with COVID depending on how many booster shots that you’ve had—that none of that matters. They argue that as long as the Biden administration, the Justice Department, the FDA, and the Department of Defense go along with this scam, nobody can ever hold them accountable.
The only way to hold them accountable is the Brook Jackson suit.”
Jackson, who has dedicated nearly twenty years to helping get safe and effective therapeutics, vaccines, and devices to consumers, began working for Ventavia on September 8, 2020. Her primary responsibility was overseeing Pfizer’s Phase 3 COVID-19 mRNA “vaccine” trial at several locations in Texas. With no reason to initially doubt anything about Pfizer’s drug product or trial, Jackson took her job seriously and was shocked at the poor laboratory management at Ventavia, which calls itself the largest privately owned research company in Texas. Jackson documented several matters of concern, including needles sticking out of bags and vaccine packaging materials with trial participants’ identification numbers written on them left out in the open, potentially unblinding participants. Moreover, with doctored data throughout the trial, participants with severe adverse reactions were ignored, also against protocol. With the agreement for Pfizer to deliver a safe, effective vaccine for the prevention of COVID-19, Barnes highlighted the clinical trial atrocities, explaining:
“It was supposed to be a randomized test. It wasn’t. It was supposed to be a placebo-controlled test. It wasn’t. It was supposed to be a blinded clinical trial. It wasn’t. All the data was doctored, and the data, in many ways, was fabricated or falsified.”
Pointing out Pfizer’s incredibly well-constructed deception, Barnes explained that certifications were fraudulent, invoices were bogus, and Pfizer further argued that it didn’t have to comply with the FDA rules, which is untrue and was rightly pointed out by Judge Truncale in Wednesday’s hearing. According to Barnes, Pfizer’s contract clearly states that it must follow FDA rules and regulations throughout the entire process. And most importantly, as previously noted, the contract Pfizer signed with the DoD states at least “half a dozen times” that Pfizer will deliver “a safe, effective vaccine for the prevention of COVID-19.” A task at which the company failed miserably.
With mounting evidence underlining the extreme measures Pfizer took to deceive the American people as the Biden administration stood by and watched, Barnes hinted that he thinks the next wave of potential litigation against Pfizer and Moderna will be centered around the fact they lied to their shareholders. Barnes pointed out that just as Pfizer and Moderna lied to the Trump Defense Department by stating they would deliver a safe and effective vaccine for the prevention of COVID-19, the pharma giants also told their shareholders the same thing. Yet, the vaccine is neither safe nor effective. According to Barnes, that’s fraud on the market, which is one place Pfizer and Moderna have no immunity. Summarizing how perhaps Pfizer is starting to feel the heat, Barnes explained:
“Right now, they’re begging the court not to allow any discovery to occur in this case. They argue that no court process should be allowed and that no jury should be allowed to hear the case. They made this argument explicitly. In fact, what they said is, ‘once the FDA says something, judge, you judge, have no more power to say a single thing about this. You, the jury has no more power to say a single thing about this.’ [Which is] directly contrary to the False Claims Act.
And the key is if this fraud is exposed, that opens the door for them to be held accountable across the board.”
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 9,016
- Reaction score
- 11,676
- Points
- 113
I hope Ms. Jackson has life insurance.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 18,575
- Reaction score
- 29,902
- Points
- 113
- Location
- The nearest Steelers bar.
Anybody else checking in on the Congressional hearings regarding censorship? The behavior of the (D)imbos is grotesque. These blithering imbeciles want two journalists - Matt Taibbi and Michael Schellengerger - to reveal sources, accuse them of being (R) mouthpieces* and state that they are lying about the documented censorship because they like the money and attention.** Here is one example of a so-called "disinformation" site (funded by government, consulting with government) working to suppress admittedly TRUE information about vaccine side-effects:
* Da fuq?? Do these morons have any hint of a clue who Matt Taibbi is??? Hint: NOT a conservative mouthpiece. Worked for that right-wing news organization, Rolling Stone, for 10 years.
** Okay, hold up here. A POLITICIAN accuses a private citizen of behaving in a manner designed to get MONEY and ATTENTION??
* Da fuq?? Do these morons have any hint of a clue who Matt Taibbi is??? Hint: NOT a conservative mouthpiece. Worked for that right-wing news organization, Rolling Stone, for 10 years.
** Okay, hold up here. A POLITICIAN accuses a private citizen of behaving in a manner designed to get MONEY and ATTENTION??
Just wait we said. The bad news keeps rolling in.
Figure 1. The projected overall excess mortality in Australia for 2022 is extraordinarily high (30,449 deaths which is around a 20% increase over the normal baseline). Something must be causing this. And it has to be big.
Figure 2 If you shift the vaccination curve by 6 months, it seems to align well with the death spikes.
Figure 3. If you plot excess mortality on a percentage basis over baseline for that age group, you find that the 0-44 age group has an excess mortality increase that is difficult to explain if it isn’t the COVID vaccine. Not only is it elevated, but it remains elevated. This is problematic because COVID comes in waves and it disproportionally affects the elderly. So something is killing young people and it started at the same time they rolled out the boosters in Australia. I wonder what it could be?
Clearly, the excess mortality has skyrocketed in late 2021. This is hard to explain, especially for the 0-44 year-olds in Figure 3.
There has to be something causing this effect, it has to be novel, and it has to be something that is affecting a huge number of people in that age group at that time.
Interestingly, it seems that the boosters rolled out in Australia in December 2021 (drag the timeline slider to see this). So it could be the vaccine. We can’t rule it out. Is there a more likely alternative explanation?
In Sy’s underlying paper he uses the Bradford Hill criteria to explain how the COVID vaccine is causing this effect.
Is there an alternate hypothesis for the sudden increase in excess deaths among all age groups, but especially the 0 – 44 year olds, that is more likely than Sy’s hypothesis, i.e., where the Bradford Hill criteria shows a stronger signal?
There are only two possible answers to that question:
How are they ever going to explain the excess mortality data in Australia?
Australia didn’t have a lot of COVID deaths until after they rolled out the COVID vaccines. Now excess deaths are out of control. Something is causing those deaths. Any guesses??
Executive summary
Consider the following 3 figures from Wilson Sy’s summary paper, The cure is the disease: Australia’s iatrogenic pandemic:
Figure 1. The projected overall excess mortality in Australia for 2022 is extraordinarily high (30,449 deaths which is around a 20% increase over the normal baseline). Something must be causing this. And it has to be big.
Figure 2 If you shift the vaccination curve by 6 months, it seems to align well with the death spikes.
Figure 3. If you plot excess mortality on a percentage basis over baseline for that age group, you find that the 0-44 age group has an excess mortality increase that is difficult to explain if it isn’t the COVID vaccine. Not only is it elevated, but it remains elevated. This is problematic because COVID comes in waves and it disproportionally affects the elderly. So something is killing young people and it started at the same time they rolled out the boosters in Australia. I wonder what it could be?
Clearly, the excess mortality has skyrocketed in late 2021. This is hard to explain, especially for the 0-44 year-olds in Figure 3.
There has to be something causing this effect, it has to be novel, and it has to be something that is affecting a huge number of people in that age group at that time.
Interestingly, it seems that the boosters rolled out in Australia in December 2021 (drag the timeline slider to see this). So it could be the vaccine. We can’t rule it out. Is there a more likely alternative explanation?
In Sy’s underlying paper he uses the Bradford Hill criteria to explain how the COVID vaccine is causing this effect.
Is there an alternate hypothesis for the sudden increase in excess deaths among all age groups, but especially the 0 – 44 year olds, that is more likely than Sy’s hypothesis, i.e., where the Bradford Hill criteria shows a stronger signal?
There are only two possible answers to that question:
- If there is a better hypothesis, then why are the Australian health authorities keeping it secret from the public? Shouldn’t they be notifying people?
- If there is not a better explanation, then why aren’t the Australian health authorities saying anything to warn the public of the risk?
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2014
- Messages
- 14,590
- Reaction score
- 16,953
- Points
- 113
Gotta be Trump's fault, no doubt. That Russian backing, misogynistic, racist, collaborator!!!Just wait we said. The bad news keeps rolling in.
How are they ever going to explain the excess mortality data in Australia?
Australia didn’t have a lot of COVID deaths until after they rolled out the COVID vaccines. Now excess deaths are out of control. Something is causing those deaths. Any guesses??
Executive summary
Consider the following 3 figures from Wilson Sy’s summary paper, The cure is the disease: Australia’s iatrogenic pandemic:
Figure 1. The projected overall excess mortality in Australia for 2022 is extraordinarily high (30,449 deaths which is around a 20% increase over the normal baseline). Something must be causing this. And it has to be big.
Figure 2 If you shift the vaccination curve by 6 months, it seems to align well with the death spikes.
Figure 3. If you plot excess mortality on a percentage basis over baseline for that age group, you find that the 0-44 age group has an excess mortality increase that is difficult to explain if it isn’t the COVID vaccine. Not only is it elevated, but it remains elevated. This is problematic because COVID comes in waves and it disproportionally affects the elderly. So something is killing young people and it started at the same time they rolled out the boosters in Australia. I wonder what it could be?
Clearly, the excess mortality has skyrocketed in late 2021. This is hard to explain, especially for the 0-44 year-olds in Figure 3.
There has to be something causing this effect, it has to be novel, and it has to be something that is affecting a huge number of people in that age group at that time.
Interestingly, it seems that the boosters rolled out in Australia in December 2021 (drag the timeline slider to see this). So it could be the vaccine. We can’t rule it out. Is there a more likely alternative explanation?
In Sy’s underlying paper he uses the Bradford Hill criteria to explain how the COVID vaccine is causing this effect.
Is there an alternate hypothesis for the sudden increase in excess deaths among all age groups, but especially the 0 – 44 year olds, that is more likely than Sy’s hypothesis, i.e., where the Bradford Hill criteria shows a stronger signal?
There are only two possible answers to that question:
- If there is a better hypothesis, then why are the Australian health authorities keeping it secret from the public? Shouldn’t they be notifying people?
- If there is not a better explanation, then why aren’t the Australian health authorities saying anything to warn the public of the risk?
February's update on Athletes Dying Suddenly
1520 Athlete Cardiac Arrests, Serious Issues, 1043 of Them Dead, Since COVID Injection - Real Science
It is not normal for young athletes to suffer cardiac arrest or death while playing sport, but most of these come shortly after a COVID shot.
goodsciencing.com
February 2023 – (Day/Month/Year)
- 25/02/2023 England Dead
Michael Palmer (23), Crowland Town FC Footballer collapsed during a match. He was rushed to hospital, but never regained consciousness. News Story News Story2 News Story3 News Story4 - 24/02/2023 Ireland Dead
Tom Tierney (46), former star rugby union star player for Ireland and for clubs including Leicester Tigers and then coach died suddenly. News Story News Story2 News Story3 News Story4 - 24/02/2023 Illinois, USA Dead
Matt Pobereyko (31), American baseball player for Mexican team Saraperos de Saltillo. He was found unexpectedly Dead in his apartment in Illinois. His brother said “I understand he would have gotten a clean bill of health if he had a pulse.” News Story News Story2 News Story3 News Story4 - 21/02/2023 Virgin Islands, USA Dead
Jamaie Cail (42), former late 1990s and early 2000s swimming champion was found dead at home. News Story News Story2 News Story3 News Story4 - 20/02/2023 Nevada, USA Dead
Ryan Keeler (20), UNLV American Football player died unexpectedly. News Story News Story2 News Story3 News Story4 - 20/02/2023 Nevada, USA Dead
Ryan Keeler (20), UNLV American Football player was found dead unexpectedly after apparently feeling nauseous for several days. News Story News Story2 News Story3 News Story4 - 11/02/2023 Belgium Dead
Arne Espeel (25), Winkel Sport B football goalkeeper collapsed just after saving a penalty, when he felt unwell. He was revived and taken to hospital, but died soon after. News Story News Story2 News Story3 News Story4 - 10/02/2023 New Jersey, USA Dead
Elijah Jordan Brown-Garcia (12), American Football player collapsed during light football training. No-one around knew CPR so they waited for an ambulance, which was delayed. At the hospital, he was pronounced dead. News Story News Story2 News Story3 - 07/02/2023 Greece Dead
Vassilis Christodoulou (21), Knights of Charilaou basketball player suffered a sudden cardiac arrest at home alone and died. News Story News Story2 News Story3 - 07/02/2023 Michigan, USA Dead
Cartier Woods (18), Basketball player at Northwestern High School in Detroit, Michigan suffered a cardiac arrest during a basketball game against Fredrick Douglass Academy. He died in hospital one week later. News Story News Story2 News Story3 News Story4 - 06/02/2023 Canada Dead
William Caron-Cabrera (17), high school American football player in Canada died in his sleep due to a cardiac arrest. News Story News Story2 News Story3 News Story4 - 05/02/2023 Spain Dead
Ado Hadi (21), Nigerian CD Madridejos Football player collapsed in the middle of a match against SP Cabanillas. Resuscitation attempts failed and he died. News Story News Story2 News Story3 News Story4 - 04/02/2023 Arizona, USA Dead
Pierre Lipton (26), star performer academically and in sport. He collapsed after crossing the finish line of the Meza Marathon in Arizona, a personal best time. He received immediate attention from a paramedic but was unable to be saved. News Story News Story2 News Story3 News Story4
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 9,016
- Reaction score
- 11,676
- Points
- 113
FDA lining up with Moderna against justice.
Justice 1
FDA/Moderna 0
today
Justice 1
FDA/Moderna 0
today
"Just wait for what!?!?" /Floggy
Boom. Facts.
It made news this week when The Lancet, a once-respected medical journal, finally admitted that there’s such a thing as “natural immunity” with COVID. (Is it too much to hope that, in another three years, The Lancet will cease referring to women as “bodies with vaginas”?)
Several months into “15 days to flatten the curve,” actual experts, like the Great Barrington Declaration scientists, began screaming from the rooftops about natural immunity. They argued — correctly, as it turns out — that we should protect the vulnerable while allowing those not at risk to go about their lives, get COVID and acquire immunity.
Millions upon millions of wrecked lives later (including 170,000 excess non-COVID deaths), the people who lied to us for their own selfish motives — getting on TV, high ratings for their panic porn, the joys of bossing other people around — are quietly admitting the truth.
Contrary to hysterical warnings in 2020 that “people you know” will die from COVID and “it’s definitely not just the flu,” I still don’t know anyone who knows anyone who died from COVID. For most people, it was “just the flu.”
How could the truth about natural immunity be suppressed for so long? At least there weren’t repeated studies during our COVID hell proving the strength and durability of immunity from a prior COVID infection.
Oh, except these:
May 2021: Washington University School of Medicine study finds “robust” antibodies still present at least 11 months after infection.
June 2021: Cleveland Clinic study finds no benefit from vaccination to those with natural immunity.
July 2021: Emory University Vaccine Center study finds “durable and broad immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection.”
August 2021: Israel study finds natural immunity “confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization” than two shots of the vaccine.
But medical journals, the mainstream media and “public health authorities” dismissed the notion that a prior COVID infection served any useful purpose. Those who mentioned it were treated like flat-earthers.
Days after the Great Barrington Declaration was released, the man chosen by President Donald Trump to lead the country’s response to COVID, Anthony Fauci, and Trump’s director of the National Institutes of Health, Francis Collins, colluded to ensure there would be a “quick and devastating published takedown” of the declaration.
As we now know, Twitter dutifully shadow-banned at least one of the signatories, Jay Bhattacharya.
Governors who followed the science — as opposed to Anthony THE SCIENCE Fauci — and opened their states were ripped in deranged headlines.
— “God Save the Florida Governor From His Stupidity” — The New Republic
“Georgia’s Experiment in Human Sacrifice” — The Atlantic. (President Trump also criticized the state, after a careful examination of the scientific evidence, no doubt.)
The final score on age-adjusted COVID deaths by state proves that the shutdowns accomplished absolutely nothing. Florida, for example, did way better than New York, New Jersey, West Virginia and Washington, D.C. — all top 10 “most aggressive” lockdown states. New Jersey did a lot worse than Wyoming, Kansas and Missouri, three of the least locked-down states. Whatever the explanation for the death rates — ethnicity, wealth, education, population density — it’s clearly not about how masked and locked-down a state was.
The Lancet’s long-delayed admission sent me to Nexis to review the important medical advice I’d been getting from MSNBC’s TV doctors.
— “The 11th Hour With Brian Williams,” June 7, 2020
Dr. Murtaza Akhter, clinical assistant professor at the University of Arizona College of Medicine: “Natural immunity is fine for a little bit. But that is not the way to protect yourself. The way to protect yourself from COVID is by being vaccinated and by just not getting it.”
— “All In With Chris Hayes,” Oct. 18, 2021
Dr. Syra Madad, an infectious disease epidemiologist and senior director of the Special Pathogens Program at New York Health and Hospitals system: “With natural infection … it’s like playing a game of Russian roulette. … You know, through natural infection, you’re risking a whole lot, not just yourself, but you know, for the community.”
— “Andrea Mitchell Reports,” Oct. 27, 2021
Dr. Vin Gupta, NBC News medical contributor (in one of hundreds of appearances on MSNBC, I’m sure to the delight of his overworked colleagues): “People relying on natural protection, those antibodies are just not where they need to be to prevent an infection.”
— “The 11th Hour With Brian Williams,” Nov. 18, 2021
Gupta: “Natural immunity is 20% as effective at keeping you out of the hospital, in preventing serious illness. … It’s not nearly as effective as vaccine-induced immunity.”
— “The ReidOut With Joy Reid,” Jan. 10, 2022
Dr. Kavita Patel, MSNBC medical contributor: “Here’s the problem with natural immunity. It doesn’t last at the same levels forever.”
You couldn’t get the truth about a worldwide pandemic that led to catastrophic responses from public health authorities, but at least MSNBC’s doctors were “diverse”!
15 Days to Flatten the Truth
It made news this week when The Lancet, a once-respected medical journal, finally admitted that there’s such a thing as “natural immunity” with COVID. (Is it too much to hope that, in another three years, The Lancet will cease referring to women as “bodies with vaginas”?)
Several months into “15 days to flatten the curve,” actual experts, like the Great Barrington Declaration scientists, began screaming from the rooftops about natural immunity. They argued — correctly, as it turns out — that we should protect the vulnerable while allowing those not at risk to go about their lives, get COVID and acquire immunity.
Millions upon millions of wrecked lives later (including 170,000 excess non-COVID deaths), the people who lied to us for their own selfish motives — getting on TV, high ratings for their panic porn, the joys of bossing other people around — are quietly admitting the truth.
Contrary to hysterical warnings in 2020 that “people you know” will die from COVID and “it’s definitely not just the flu,” I still don’t know anyone who knows anyone who died from COVID. For most people, it was “just the flu.”
How could the truth about natural immunity be suppressed for so long? At least there weren’t repeated studies during our COVID hell proving the strength and durability of immunity from a prior COVID infection.
Oh, except these:
May 2021: Washington University School of Medicine study finds “robust” antibodies still present at least 11 months after infection.
June 2021: Cleveland Clinic study finds no benefit from vaccination to those with natural immunity.
July 2021: Emory University Vaccine Center study finds “durable and broad immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection.”
August 2021: Israel study finds natural immunity “confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization” than two shots of the vaccine.
But medical journals, the mainstream media and “public health authorities” dismissed the notion that a prior COVID infection served any useful purpose. Those who mentioned it were treated like flat-earthers.
Days after the Great Barrington Declaration was released, the man chosen by President Donald Trump to lead the country’s response to COVID, Anthony Fauci, and Trump’s director of the National Institutes of Health, Francis Collins, colluded to ensure there would be a “quick and devastating published takedown” of the declaration.
As we now know, Twitter dutifully shadow-banned at least one of the signatories, Jay Bhattacharya.
Governors who followed the science — as opposed to Anthony THE SCIENCE Fauci — and opened their states were ripped in deranged headlines.
— “God Save the Florida Governor From His Stupidity” — The New Republic
“Georgia’s Experiment in Human Sacrifice” — The Atlantic. (President Trump also criticized the state, after a careful examination of the scientific evidence, no doubt.)
The final score on age-adjusted COVID deaths by state proves that the shutdowns accomplished absolutely nothing. Florida, for example, did way better than New York, New Jersey, West Virginia and Washington, D.C. — all top 10 “most aggressive” lockdown states. New Jersey did a lot worse than Wyoming, Kansas and Missouri, three of the least locked-down states. Whatever the explanation for the death rates — ethnicity, wealth, education, population density — it’s clearly not about how masked and locked-down a state was.
The Lancet’s long-delayed admission sent me to Nexis to review the important medical advice I’d been getting from MSNBC’s TV doctors.
— “The 11th Hour With Brian Williams,” June 7, 2020
Dr. Murtaza Akhter, clinical assistant professor at the University of Arizona College of Medicine: “Natural immunity is fine for a little bit. But that is not the way to protect yourself. The way to protect yourself from COVID is by being vaccinated and by just not getting it.”
— “All In With Chris Hayes,” Oct. 18, 2021
Dr. Syra Madad, an infectious disease epidemiologist and senior director of the Special Pathogens Program at New York Health and Hospitals system: “With natural infection … it’s like playing a game of Russian roulette. … You know, through natural infection, you’re risking a whole lot, not just yourself, but you know, for the community.”
— “Andrea Mitchell Reports,” Oct. 27, 2021
Dr. Vin Gupta, NBC News medical contributor (in one of hundreds of appearances on MSNBC, I’m sure to the delight of his overworked colleagues): “People relying on natural protection, those antibodies are just not where they need to be to prevent an infection.”
— “The 11th Hour With Brian Williams,” Nov. 18, 2021
Gupta: “Natural immunity is 20% as effective at keeping you out of the hospital, in preventing serious illness. … It’s not nearly as effective as vaccine-induced immunity.”
— “The ReidOut With Joy Reid,” Jan. 10, 2022
Dr. Kavita Patel, MSNBC medical contributor: “Here’s the problem with natural immunity. It doesn’t last at the same levels forever.”
You couldn’t get the truth about a worldwide pandemic that led to catastrophic responses from public health authorities, but at least MSNBC’s doctors were “diverse”!
Similar threads
