You are a terrible arguer, Pelham.
Good thing you're not a lawyer.
Posted on 09/03/2021 10:43:00 PM PDT by ransomnote
You are a terrible arguer, Pelham.
Good thing you're not a lawyer.
“There is more truth among rogue, independent science, researchers, and doctors than ALL of those things you just cited.”
Based on what? Peer review? Repeatable testing?
“Many folks have had cytokine storms immediately after their clot shots. Does that count?”
Cite your source.
Outline YOUR medical credentials. You asked ransomnote that, but fail to reply with yours.
I know what happens with folks like you in combat, but you’re safe online.
Gn ;)
You insinuate that Ransomnote is too stupit to understand the research she does (because 'medical training').
I felt the insult, and I'm way over here.
You are being dishonest now.
Keep your circular arguments douche. I was married to a woman just like you.
Your turn to answer what has been asked of you before you ask anything else of anyone.
“How about you other than ad hominem attacks devoid of actual merit?”
To quote Inigo Montoya from Princess Bride, “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
Observable facts and results.
Are you serious or just playing devil's advocate for your own amusement?
p.s. Peer review when the 'peers' are corrupt is not peer review as you know it. Neither is testing. Your trust is naive and misplaced.
Try again.
I point to a Nobel prize winning doctor - get dismissed and he points to Inigo Montoyo. (splashing cold water on my face)
Yeah. Not attorney material.
No point - Massengil is just playing at this point.
See ya tomorrow
Well, to be fair. Inigo Montoya was a Spaniard.
I know, right? Especially since the CDC violated the public trust 30 years ago when Congress mandated that they set up and maintain a database to enable the public a look at potential risks/harm caused by vaccines.
Now, the CDC had zero interest in exposing what they were doing so over the course of 30 years it has intentionally rendered this system cumbersome, inaccurate, time consuming and virtually unkown in the medical community. To this day, many physicians don't know VAERS exists or how to use it.
The CDC did this for strategic purposes. Bill Gates and others decided to commandeer federal funds and do what they wanted to the public with those monies. So, in 1992 the CDC set up a 501c3? Strange, right? A federal agency operating a privately funded Foundation? Guess who their biggest donor is? That's right! Bill Gates!
Oh the CDC takes donations from George Soros, Pfizer, Moderna, Sofina and a cast of thousands. Doesn't that seem unthinkably unethical? I mean, they let the public think they serve the public, when in fact, Bill Gates and others wield CDC dollars and authority like a club to beat down public participation as they carry out their agenda.
Seems like an unsual choice - a renowed sofware engineer who wants to depopulate the world wields control over the World Health Organization, the CDC, NIH, FDA, USDA and from there, all the medical schools, universities, facilities and doctors directed by those agencies?
Well VAERS is run by the CDC and maintained by the FDA. That's why in 1992, an Act was passed that made it possible for the FDA to develop drugs with tax payer dollars and then profit personally by selling them. This put them in bed with our Pharma overlords.
I remember the good old days when Pharma products had to undergoe rigorous 3rd party testing. But with de-regulation in 1992, pharma won the right to test their own products, report their own findings etc. What a win, huh? They grade their own papers now. Is it a coincidence that Pfizer, Moderna et. al. reported ZERO serious side effects in their trials and yet, all these people are dying and having strokes, seizures etc. Weird? Huh?
So together, Pharma and Bill Gates drive medicine in the US behind the scenes, utilizing tax dollars.
Okay so back the the CDC's mandate to provide the public with access to vaccine data so citizens could decide whether or not they wanted specific 'vaccines'. Uh, yeah the CDC really betrayed the public intentionally there, am I right?
I mean, when the CDC was telling us in 2020 that we had a pandemic like one never seen before in human history - they prepared the VAERS database to handle the massive number of vaccines they were going to administer right?
RIGHT? Uh. Well. No. The CDC did nothing to make VAERS ready for Covid vaccine reporting! Nothing at all. They didn't even train sufficient staff so the Covid reports could be kept up to date. They are months behind even now. When the CDC does update VAERS these days, they focus on loading records from Dec 2020 and Jan 2021. Odd, huh?
WEll, wait. I spoke too soon. The CDC did prepare for Covid vaccines by creating a private database only the CDC could access, and then giving every single person who gets the Covid vaccine the opportunity to register for that app, and ecouraged them to report any and all adverse events real private like. That way the CDC lives up to its mandate to provide the public with a window into vaccine safety. Well, I mean. They probably meant well.....
Odd though. The CDC had a faulty system poorly designed from the start, poorly maintained and used, and as soon as this epic plandemic started, they created a private database for themselves. Like, why didn't they make a convenient phone app for users and physicians to report adverse events straight into VAERS where the public could see it? That would mean they would finally, after 30 years of neglect, live up to their mandate.
Gosh. You know, I just remembered that there's a few lawsuits based on whistleblower testimony stating that 45 thousand unreported (to VAERS) deaths are sitting in the CMS database right now (medicare). Think of it. Why, the CMS database is only 1 of 12 total databases designed to automatically feed reports of deaths and adverse events to VAERS. Gosh. Wonder how many tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of adverse events (to include deaths)...or more are not in VAERS right now?
I mean, data modeling has shown that VAERS has always recieved, by design, a tiny fraction of reports of deaths and other adverse events. In 2010 Harvard researchers showed VAERS only received about 1% of reports of adverse events actually occurring. This was big news 11 years ago.
I guess the CDC read Harvard's damning reasearch, did some soul-searching and did absolutely nothing about it for another 11 years until they finally got their big plandemic off the ground, at which point they severed server updates to halt receipt of reports and created V-Safe, their own private little adverse events database to conceal from the public, reports of vaccine harm, just like their congressional mandate directed them to do.
I can see why you're laughing, Clown.
How dare you question the *wisdom* of your betters.
What’s wrong with you? Don’t you realize they are better than you in every way and your job is simply to meekly comply with their dictates because they know better than you what you want and what’s good for you?
Sheesh…….
Our overlords have spoken. Now it’s simply our job to defer to them and let them run (or rather ruin) our lives.
A proper troll would have inserted a meme at this point.
Where did you receive your troll training?
Medical people overall have an elitist attitude towards non-medical persons. The general attitude is that anyone not medically trained is stupid beyond words and needs to learn their place.
It doesn’t seem to occur to them that someone really smart, even smarter than them, might not have gone into medicine as a matter of choice, because they didn’t want to.
It certainly is not indicative of their ability to read, learn, or understand medical issues.
| Pelham wrote: |
“You claim authority you don’t actually have.” I didn’t claim any authority. I simply asked you a question: “Where did you get your medical education?” You didn’t answer. But bizarrely, you pretended that you did, like William Macy’s character in Fargo! It’s actually pretty amusing, apparently you thought no one would notice. Weird. |
You lack the moral authority to require those you question to prove they have credentials they don't need in order to express an opinion.
I pointed out your criteria are invalid. That is my answer. Why would I labor to live up to your irrelevant criteria?
How is this hard for you to understand? You aren't 'above it all' determining who among us is qualified to state an opinion and cite data. You aren't entitled to make up criteria by which others must be judged.
I cited material intended for public consumption that makes you uncomfortable. You respond by pretending I am misrepresenting my qualifications and speaking 'above my pay grade'.
Get over yourself. You fail in every respect to make your case that somehow consumer information is not to be opined upon unless one has medical training. I can have an opinon - try to cope with that fact. To console yourself, read the mandate that required the CDC to set up VAERS, and then read the information regarding drug warnings and side effects I provided, noting as you do that I pulled information from the "Consumer" section, and not the physician section.
Or don't. But don't expect me to cave to your misdirection and pointless criteria.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.