Posted on 08/15/2022 4:10:07 AM PDT by Former Proud Canadian
Link to .pdf
https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/47/80
The use of dark-field microscopic analysis of fresh peripheral blood on a slide was once widespread in medicine, allowing a first and immediate assessment of the state of health of the corpuscular components of the blood. In the present study we analyzed with a dark-field optical microscope the peripheral blood drop from 1,006 symptomatic subjects after inoculation with an mRNA injection (Pfizer/BioNTech or Moderna), starting from March 2021. There were 948 subjects (94%of the total sample) whose blood showed aggregation of erythrocytes and the presence of particles of various shapes and sizes of unclear origin one month after the mRNA inoculation. In 12 subjects, blood was examined with the same method before vaccination, showing a perfectly normal hematological distribution. The alterations found after the inoculation of the mRNA injections further reinforce the suspicion that the modifications were due to the so-called “vaccines” themselves. We report 4 clinical cases, chosen as representative of the entire case series. Further studies are needed to define the exact nature of the particles found in the blood and to identify possible solutions to the problems they are evidently causing.
(Excerpt) Read more at lionessofjudah.substack.com ...
I asked the CDC this question. How is it that the shot does not prevent illness or transmission but does prevent severe illness? How does the shot do that, specifically?
It’s been over a month and no answer.
Several of my vaxxed to the max friends have had covid bad for a month. Is that considered severe?
And more than 50% of that older population was vaccinated.
Which means half of the deaths came from the smaller unvaccinated population!!
One more data point showing the effectiveness of the vaccines.
It's not my area of expertise but the layman's explanation is the vaccines stimulate our immune systems to produce antibodies and other defenses against the virus.
As the virus mutates it's able to bypass some of those defenses and cause infection but our bolstered immune systems are able to reduce the severity of the disease the virus causes.
Several of my vaxxed to the max friends have had covid bad for a month. Is that considered severe?
Most of the studies I'm aware of use hospitalization as a proxy for severe disease. Probably because that data is readily available while ill people at home often don't get reported to anyone.
Do you realize that argument actually validates covid vaccine failure?
No.
“poorly written, sourced...”
???
No, it is very well written and nothing wrong with any sources that I could see. In fact, imo, it’s an excelent report, and should he easily repeatable (and most certainly will).
“and about ‘symptomatic’ patients.”
So?
Why would you say such a thing???
Everyone, please read it. It’s not difficult, and looks to be a smoking gun. Should have been done by all the vax manufacturers early on. And probably was, just buried.
Here’s the abstract:
“ABSTRACT
The use of dark-field microscopic analysis of fresh peripheral blood on a slide was once widespread in medicine, allowing a first and immediate assessment of the state of health of the corpuscular components of the blood. In the present study we analyzed with a dark-field optical microscope the peripheral blood drop from 1,006 symptomatic subjects after inoculation with an mRNA injection (Pfizer/BioNTech or Moderna), starting from March 2021. There were 948 subjects (94%of the total sample) whose bloodshowed aggregation of erythrocytes and the presence of particles of various shapes and sizes of unclear origin one month after the mRNA inoculation.In 12 subjects,blood was examined with the same method before vaccination, showing a perfectly normal hematological distribution. The alterations found after the inoculation of the mRNA injections further reinforce the suspicion that the modifications were due to the so-called “vaccines”themselves. We report 4 clinical cases, chosen as representative of the entire case series. Further studies are needed to define the exact nature of the particles found in the blood and to identify possible solutions to the problems they are evidently causing.”
>> You don’t believe that the FDA and CDC and vax makers worked together? That they all made money? To the detriment of us That there is a conspiracy, partner. <<
Yes. But our case is harmed when we spout nonsense. People are much more likely to believe the FDA and the CDC than some random dentist and an acupuncturist writing in a fake journal.
And yes, I believe even the journal naming itself, “International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research” is deliberately misleading. That name implicitly denies what the journal is, which is exclusively focused on finding articles which refute the alleged safety and effectiveness of vaccines.
“Troubling study”? Hardly. This was a study of people who had reactions to mRNA vaccines. Of course they showed abnormalities.”
No, it was a study of 1006 symptomatic (with covid) patients. Didn’t say anything about adverse vax reactions. Some, they managed to get before and after samples. They looked for blood abnormalities visually, under dark field microscopy.
Very well done, easy to follow, and yes, it’s a bombshell imo.
(I’ve been in medical science and engineering for 30 years.)
“A dentist, an acupuncturist and an Ear-Nose-Throat doctor. They all have MDs, even the acupuncturist. But they’re all way out of their specialty. This raises a few concerns:”
Ad hominem? Really? Is the study good or not? Hint: It’s excellent, and an eas6 read. Even has pictures, so no excuse for the attacks on the authors.
It’s dark field microscopy of visual abnormalities in blood. Any 1st year chem student could repeat it. I could repeat it, but I’m not vaxed.
Man, lots of disinformation on this thread, trashing a good study.
[Did the NIH finally hire interns to post to FR and trash anything that reveals the horros of the vax?
Seems certain feeepers doth protest too much.]
I believe the study is suspect when you see this conclusion:
“What seems plain enough is that metallic particles resembling graphene oxide and possibly other metallic compounds, like those discovered by Gatti and Montanari (Montanari & Gatti, 2016; Gatti & Montanari, 2012, 2017, 2018), have been included in the cocktail of whatever the manufacturers have seen fit to put in the so-called mRNA “vaccines”. In our experience as clinicians, these mRNA injections are very unlike traditional “vaccines” and their manufacturers need, in our opinions, to come clean about what is in the injections and why it is there”
The study authors are engaging in normative science. That calls into question their research.
>> Ad hominem? Really? Is the study good or not? <<
It’s not ad hominem to question someone’s credentials when they’ve made an appeal to authority.
>> Is the study good or not? <<
I don’t know. That’s the point. I can find all sorts of people claiming God knows what on the internet. The purpose of citing the fact that it’s been published in a medical journal is an appeal to authority. It’s a way of saying, “a lot of people who are experts at designing and interpreting the results of a scientific study confirm that this was a well-designed experiment.” The fact that it’s a fake journal destroys the appeal to authority.
Did you read the study? For anyone objective, that would happen before commenting on the veracity.
I’m not thrilled with that conclusion, either.
However, the blood abnormalities, easily apparent with simple tools, tells me something very bad is happening. That part of the study makes it very worth it.
A) cannot avoid trolling $hot warning threads, and,
B) you have NO THREADS extolling the glorious benefits of these horrid $hots to post on.
Got it.
#DoBetter
#ThreadTrollMonitor🥉
Not long after the pandemic started, papers were coming out identifying the virus attacks on the epithelium, the inner wall of blood vessels. It has been identified as a vascular disease from almost the beginning. The alveoli in the lungs get attacked and gas exchange in the lungs is severely affected leading to poor blood oxygenation and inability to breathe. Dr. Roger Seheult in his excellent COVID Update video series. I found his updates to be most informative. He summarizes recent research papers into an easy to understand format, even for people with limited organic chemistry background.
Coronavirus Pandemic Update 63: Is COVID-19 a Disease of the Endothelium (Blood Vessels and Clots)?
Coronavirus Pandemic Update 75: COVID-19 Lung Autopsies - New Data
... and still are by hardcore vaxers.
________________________
They are calling for cancelling the CDC over loosening up on a couple of restrictions.
The vaxxers are determined that no one will escape.
>> Did you read the study? For anyone objective, that would happen before commenting on the veracity. <<
Yes, actually I did. And for anyone objective, why would you presume I didn’t?
“...why would you presume I didn’t?” (read the study)
Because you said you didn’t know if the study was good or not. It’s an easy read, eaay to tell if it’s BS or legit science.
The basic study is excellent. Large sample size, qualitative and quantitative variables measured and analyzed, and should be easily repeatable by anyone with a decent light and microscope. I could do it in my house.
It’s frankly a smoking gun.
But you read it and can’t tell? Really? Then perhap...
“Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool, than open it and remove all doubt.”
I’ve been reading and writing medtech studies for at least 30 years.
If the results are reproducible, that is helpful and concerning.
When I see conclusions or discussions that push normative science, I believe the research needs to be subject to much closer scrutiny. Federal agencies have been caught pushing normative science for several year.
Threads are not an echo chamber. Accept it.
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.