Top Doctor Blows Whistle on Exploding Cancer Rates: ‘Vaccinated Are Dying’

Disswire.com ^ | 18 March 2024 | Bradley Greer

[freds6girlies]

bookmark

[ladyjane]

A pathologist looks at slides and says if it is cancer or not and what kind of cancer.

An epidemiologist analyses morbidity and mortality data and looks for possible correlates or causes.

Very few pathologists have expertise in epidemiology. There may be a handful who claim to be experts outside of their area.

[ransomnote]

 

 

 

In the Bloggers & Personal forum, on a thread titled Top Doctor Blows Whistle on Exploding Cancer Rates: ‘Vaccinated Are Dying’, DugwayDuke wrote:

ransomnote wrote: “Of course you’re distorting the article - it’s what you do.”

You have no room for accusing others of distortion:

From Health Feedback:

CLAIM: “Pathologist reports a stunning 52% increase in cancer risk for ages 15-59 who were vaxxed”

Conclusion
Pavic’s analysis contains several flaws that invalidate its conclusions. It didn’t take into consideration the possible effect of confounding factors, such as age and health-seeking behaviors, that could influence both the likelihood of getting vaccinated and the likelihood of a cancer diagnosis. It also used an improperly calculated vaccine coverage of the general population as a baseline to assess whether vaccinated individuals are overrepresented among cancer patients.

Furthermore, Pavic’s analysis and Kirsch’s conclusions are at odds with observations from medical experts, who haven’t observed an increase in cancer following COVID-19 vaccination to date . Observations available to date show that COVID-19 vaccines are safe with benefits in terms of protection against severe diseases outweighing their risks.

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/steve-kirsch-promotes-flawed-study-making-false-claim-covid19-vaccines-cancer-risk/

In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Scientists STUNNED by First Proofs of Contaminated DNA Getting Absorbed into Human Cells –“Sunak Better Watch Out” says Dr Bhakdi, ransomnote wrote:

To those who prefer that we trust Deep State fake fact checkers - please investigate such fact checkers before admonishing others, or using them to 'debunk' the few medical voices running the gauntlet, being fired, having continous lawsuits, receiving death threats etc. I'm not saying every contrary voice is the 'truth'; I'm just saying too often the baby is thrown out with the bathwater.

 

I went to the Health Feedback webpage and found it lacking the usual menu of organizational information. I checked their funding/partners tab which dropped me on their parent website, ScienceFeedback.org. That's where you can tell this is Deep State MSM propaganda 'fact checking' which is being used to censore and silence people.

Just as an aside - those behind the Covid 'Vaccines' are never going to admit to anything. Pfizer's documentation which they tried to hide for 75 years has been obtained a teams of medical people going through the documentation have hard proof we were lied to extensively. Hvae you heard any admission that Pfizer's documentation reflects poorly on 'the science' used to force toxic 'vaccines' on people? No. They'll never admit it.

So looking at the parent company, ScienceFeedback.org, I found some big tech fake fact checkers used to falsely portray dissenting voices as fabricated misinformation 'conspiracy theorists'.

First up is Google. When have they EVER advocated for the truth?

IFCN / Google News Initiative

In 2020, Science Feedback was awarded seed funding from the Google News Initiative to build a database of fact-checked content, allowing to identify sources that repeatedly spread misinformation. See Open Feedback

ransomnote: Then we have the European equivalent for 'controlling' messaging.

European Media and Information Fund

In 2022, Science Feedback received a grant from the European Media and Information Fund (EMIF) to explore ways to assess the credibility of news sources at scale.

ransomnote: Then we have Mark Zuckerberg's Meta, and his fake fact checkers who work to control 'the narrative' and censor legitimate content.

Meta Third Party Fact Checking program

Since 2019, Science Feedback has been partnering with Meta to verify the credibility of viral content on Facebook and Instagram as part of the third-party fact-checking initiative. Learn more.

---

ransomnote: Lots wrong with TikTok, but what we're seeing is HOW big Tech controls what is perceived as fact.

TikTok Safety Partners

Since 2020, Science Feedback has been partnering with TikTok as part of the Safety Partners’ program to help review and assess viral videos that potentially contain false, misleading or harmful information. We review videos mostly on health issues in the following languages: English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian. Learn more about the program.

ransomnote: In particular, I recognized The Poynter Group, having investigated them before. If you dig around the website you find their 'sister organizations' include Politifact, which I think most will recognize as a  political misinformation hub.

The advice to investigate source materials is good. The same must be done for 'fact checkers' because these are being used to support the Faucist/CDC 'narrative' and whenever possible, cancel or damage truth-tellers.

 

[ladyjane]

This woman graduated from medical school in Croatia. She claims also to have a MPH. Big deal, that means she might have had one course in epidemiology. She also claims to be a volleyball coach.

I know a lot of pathologists. I don’t know even one, even at NIH or Harvard, who would claim to know what caused the incidence rates of certain cancers to have increased dramatically.

Before anybody gets panicking consider the source.

[dadfly]

there’s another interesting inference (educated guess) i could draw from the article numbers:

it says cancer diagnoses amount to 135/100K in AUS vs 87/100K in the US in the article.

comparing the diagnosis rates just between the US and AUS, we get, 135+87 = 222 and so 135/222 = 61%. so we have 39% for the US giving us a difference of 61-39= 22%. so to me, the number also suggests 22 less working adults in 100 took the jab in the US then in AUS—if the jab is indeed causing most of the extra cancer.

now, if in AUS we estimate 95% took the jab, and we assume that is the reason for the difference in diagnosis rates, comparing ratios, we estimate that (95-22)% = 73% took the jab among the same cohort in the US. (doing this on the fly so check my math if you’re so inclined.)

so it gives me another indirect way of getting an estimate of how many took the jab among working adults in the US. that means we have at least 1 in 4 courageous and thinking adults still in America, which is a good thing.

i’ve seen estimates from the CDC saying that up to 90% adults took the jab in the US (which i don’t believe on it’s face). my estimate again argues against theirs. doesn’t surprise me in the least that theirs would be off by 20%. in other words, it supports my opinion that the the CDC lies with numbers every which way.

[DugwayDuke]

ransomnote wrote: “To those who prefer that we trust Deep State fake fact checkers - please investigate such fact checkers before admonishing others, or using them to ‘debunk’ the few medical voices running the gauntlet, being fired, having continous lawsuits, receiving death threats etc. I’m not saying every contrary voice is the ‘truth’; I’m just saying too often the baby is thrown out with the bathwater.”

Now we’re bing lectured on fact checking sources by the head of the QAnon faction on FreeRepublic.

[Karoo]

how about shingles? or the tetanus?

[Republican Wildcat]

So essentially the same credentials (that is, little to none) that these conspiracy articles saying “Top Doctor” all have.

But as noted above, the article cites out of the gate, including in what the poster chose to excerpt, data from 1990 - 2019, before the pandemic and certainly before any vaccines were administered.

[Republican Wildcat]

The cited study in the article he was responding to is indeed from 1990-2019. Those dates are before the pandemic and long before any vaccines were administered, so they could not possibly, in any way, shape, manner, or form have any effect on the trends the study showed. It is completely and totally false to state otherwise.

Stop the nonsense already. It is beyond shameless at this point.

[Republican Wildcat]

Now we’re bing lectured on fact checking sources by the head of the QAnon faction on FreeRepublic.

Yes - the same person who posted 2 month old articles that a "mass die off" would start in 2 months - beyond the time the article was dated, then a 90 day "mass die off" in the same fashion, posts articles that completely contradict themselves on the very same day, posts articles saying Japan ended all vaccines and switched to alternate treatments and covid disappeared "overnight" (none of that happened), posted article saying that "satin" was actually a code word for "Satan", etc. That's who is lecturing you on "facts" - a person who constantly posts articles with false information for years on end.

[fwdude]

I got my shingles vaccine several years ago. I may make an exception for tetanus. That one’s been around a long time.

[Harpotoo]

All in the name of DEPOPULATION in case you haven’t figured out what the Elites have done around the world!

[ransomnote]

In the Bloggers & Personal forum, on a thread titled Top Doctor Blows Whistle on Exploding Cancer Rates: ‘Vaccinated Are Dying’, Republican Wildcat wrote:

The cited study in the article he was responding to is indeed from 1990-2019. Those dates are before the pandemic and long before any vaccines were administered, so they could not possibly, in any way, shape, manner, or form have any effect on the trends the study showed. It is completely and totally false to state otherwise.

Stop the nonsense already. It is beyond shameless at this point.

Stop the ghoulish shilling for the pharma/CDC regime.

Last time DougwayDuke posted trash from disinformation hub 'HealthFeedback.com' and tried to make it seem authoritative, I pointed out the content was worthless with this post:

In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Scientists STUNNED by First Proofs of Contaminated DNA Getting Absorbed into Human Cells –“Sunak Better Watch Out” says Dr Bhakdi, ransomnote wrote:

To those who prefer that we trust Deep State fake fact checkers - please investigate such fact checkers before admonishing others, or using them to 'debunk' the few medical voices running the gauntlet, being fired, having continous lawsuits, receiving death threats etc. I'm not saying every contrary voice is the 'truth'; I'm just saying too often the baby is thrown out with the bathwater.

 

I went to the Health Feedback webpage and found it lacking the usual menu of organizational information. I checked their funding/partners tab which dropped me on their parent website, ScienceFeedback.org. That's where you can tell this is Deep State MSM propaganda 'fact checking' which is being used to censore and silence people.

Just as an aside - those behind the Covid 'Vaccines' are never going to admit to anything. Pfizer's documentation which they tried to hide for 75 years has been obtained a teams of medical people going through the documentation have hard proof we were lied to extensively. Hvae you heard any admission that Pfizer's documentation reflects poorly on 'the science' used to force toxic 'vaccines' on people? No. They'll never admit it.

So looking at the parent company, ScienceFeedback.org, I found some big tech fake fact checkers used to falsely portray dissenting voices as fabricated misinformation 'conspiracy theorists'.

First up is Google. When have they EVER advocated for the truth?

IFCN / Google News Initiative

In 2020, Science Feedback was awarded seed funding from the Google News Initiative to build a database of fact-checked content, allowing to identify sources that repeatedly spread misinformation. See Open Feedback

ransomnote: Then we have the European equivalent for 'controlling' messaging.

European Media and Information Fund

In 2022, Science Feedback received a grant from the European Media and Information Fund (EMIF) to explore ways to assess the credibility of news sources at scale.

ransomnote: Then we have Mark Zuckerberg's Meta, and his fake fact checkers who work to control 'the narrative' and censor legitimate content.

Meta Third Party Fact Checking program

Since 2019, Science Feedback has been partnering with Meta to verify the credibility of viral content on Facebook and Instagram as part of the third-party fact-checking initiative. Learn more.

---

ransomnote: Lots wrong with TikTok, but what we're seeing is HOW big Tech controls what is perceived as fact.

TikTok Safety Partners

Since 2020, Science Feedback has been partnering with TikTok as part of the Safety Partners’ program to help review and assess viral videos that potentially contain false, misleading or harmful information. We review videos mostly on health issues in the following languages: English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian. Learn more about the program.

ransomnote: In particular, I recognized The Poynter Group, having investigated them before. If you dig around the website you find their 'sister organizations' include Politifact, which I think most will recognize as a  political misinformation hub.

The advice to investigate source materials is good. The same must be done for 'fact checkers' because these are being used to support the Faucist/CDC 'narrative' and whenever possible, cancel or damage truth-tellers.

So this time when you posted your trash fake news from HealthFeedback, you didn't attribute your quote to Healthfeedback, you just hoped no one would notice. Oh but I found your quote in your favorite disinfo hub:

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/steve-kirsch-promotes-flawed-study-making-false-claim-covid19-vaccines-cancer-risk/

You lied and said "so they could not possibly, in any way, shape, manner, or form have any effect on the trends the study showed." Do you ever NOT lie? Those disinfo hubs play with numbers and attribution. That's why the deep state funds them. The article mirrors independent reports coming out soon after the 'vaccine' rollout, with Dr. Cole, who owns a pathology lab, reporting skyrocketing cancer rates. All around the world the reports surface but you never seem to be aware of any of that because you only specialize in talking point disinformation hubs.