| In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Post Covid 'Vaccination' Adverse Events Through Through 03/25/2022 (more specific statistics now available) 74% of all post vax deaths in VAERS 30+ year history are for Covid 'vaccines', semimojo wrote: |
THere's no formal study specific to your needs - the CDC/NIH would never allow the comparison you pretend… |
This isn't about Fauci. This is about the tens of thousands of medical professionals who you're accusing of intentionally misleading the public about the safety of these vaccines.
Regardless of leadership the people on the front lines examining the data, reviewing the deaths and other adverse events, etc.m know what they're seeing. You're accusing them of concealing very damaging information. That's slander of everyday healthcare workers and you can't escape it.
The CDC has infiltrated colleges and medicine at every level - to prepare for 'Covid', they even federally licensed all the hospitals in the US.
Yeah, yeah, the bogeyman did it, and if you don't believe in the bogeyman you must be in on the conspiracy.
Of course it is, only you and the CDC claim it isn't.
We'll, me, the CDC, and 99% of the public health experts in the world.
You, on the other hand, have a relatively tiny handful of fringe characters, like Kirsch who has zero medical training or background, most of whom are making money from their contrarian positions.
No, the reason why you say that is because the VAERS data exposes those in our government conducting biowarfare on the public.
LOL. The all-powerful CDC, which can manipulate the entire world's healthcare systems to perpetrate it's hoax, can't control and massage the information in a database it solicits and maintains.
Instead, brave, intrepid patriots are the only ones who “really” know what the data represent.
Do you ever stop to think about the implications of these conspiracy theories?
Dr. Josh Guetzkow went through the laborious process of identifying normal 'background levels' of symptoms following Covid 'vaccination' and comparing them to those same symptoms experienced after Covid 'vaccination'.
He did no such thing. He compared Covid vaccines to previous adverse event reporting for other vaccines. This might have some validity if he could show previous event reporting system had the same level of participation and people were exactly as likely to report an event for another vaccine as for Covid. Of course he can't do that.
You've stumbled upon a good approach - identifying the background level of events in the unvaccinated and comparing it to the vaccinated - but Guetzkow doesn't even attempt this, let alone succeed.
You seem to think that if you post enough mis-analysis of adverse event data the sheer volume will overcome the underlying fatal flaws in these self-reporting systems.
Hey while you guys are busy playing the game, why not tell us all how Dr. Malone and Steve Kirsch end up being 'grifters' for speaking out against the lies and damage the CDC/NIH/FDA and your kind are spreading?
You mean the Dr. Malone who believes the mRNA vaccine are safe and effective? So much so he and Peter Nevarro penned an op-ed in the Washington Times advocating giving them to our most vulnerable, highest risk population?
Of course, he doesn't advertise that position now that he's a media darling and making money from his Substack subscribers who would never stand for that stance.
As for Kirsch, as we know, once they've made money what many rich people really crave is attention.
Say if you want 1 million dollars, then debate STeve Kirsch and his team on the hard evidence they gathered.
It isn't the evidence that's wrong, it's the interpretation.
Yes, that's your idea of 'grifters' I guess; men who will pay government agents 1 million dollars just to debate the scientific merits behind the ghastly vaccines being forced upon the public.
Actually, that's a great indication of a grift. Serious people interested in scientific truth don't do public spectacle “debates” with entirely unqualified showmen like Kirsch. They do honest research, have it reviewed by peers, and publish it where the scientific community can evaluate and critique it.
They don't do carnival side shows.
That was your effort to dismiss the documented information in VAERS which exposes the toxic 'vaccines'.
No, VAERS says there more events self-reported after Covid vaccinations than after tetanus. Full stop. You take that uncontested fact and make a gigantic rhetorical leap to toxicity.
I asked: Are those who have gotten the vaccines statistically more likely to have these events? If you can't answer that question, with supporting evidence, you can't credibly say the vaccines are harmful.
Yes, those who have gotten the vaccines are statistically more likely to have these events (e.g., die). I and many have answered that question…
Interesting. VAERS and the other adverse event reporting systems don't have any data on the unvaccinated population yet you claim to have done a statistical analysis of events in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated.
Please provide your analysis and the sources of the data.