Covid Injection Aftermath: Study finds 94% of “Vaccine” Recipients have Pre-Blood Clot Formations and Foreign Particles

Clots are probably the least of your worries. You’re risk of cancer, repeated CoVid infections, expression of latent viral infection, protein plaques etc... is greatly increased.

All for an infection easy treated if comorbid, and shrugged off by 99+% of the healthy.

But, you are winning for the time being! Good Luck!

541 posted on 08/29/2022 12:38:48 PM PDT by Axenolith (WWG1WGA!c)

To: metmom; entropy12

(Allegra, I do not consider your opinion meaningless. I’m simply recognizing entropy’s opinion)

I hear ya and I understand. :) You raise good questions.

I’ve never claimed to be “medically qualified,” but I don’t know what entropy is going on about half the time.

I personally think he has a bit of an inferiority complex and that causes some strange behavior in people.

I do pray for his wife and for him. I’m certainly no fan of his numerous chest-thumping, “look at meeeee” posts and the arrogant attitude, but I don’t hate anybody and I don’t wish any ill on them. (I just wish he’d give the whole “I’m so amazing” and “nothing burger” stuff a rest.)

542 posted on 08/29/2022 12:45:44 PM PDT by Allegra

To: SecAmndmt; CatHerd

“Interesting how you go after Dr Wolf’s credentials. “

Did she mention the Inside Higher Ed article?

“Dozens of mistakes identified in Naomi Wolf’s University of Oxford doctoral thesis raise challenging questions for British graduate education and its examinations process, according to a historian.

“The American feminist’s D.Phil. dissertation has attracted interest in recent years because it was the basis for her 2019 book, Outrages: Censorship and the Criminalisation of Love, which was pulped by her U.S. publisher after she wrongly claimed that Britain had in the Victorian era executed several men for being gay.

“Other factual errors were also spotted in a reissued edition, with several of the men cited as examples of antigay injustice actually having been convicted for sexual offenses against children and animals.

“The mistakes led to questions about how they were missed by Wolf’s supervisor and examiners, but her dissertation remained under embargo for six years after being examined in April 2015.

“It was finally published this month (April 2021) on Oxford’s online research archive, alongside nine pages of corrections that address Wolf’s misreading of criminal records and cite several texts that contradict claims that the mid- to late Victorian period saw an escalation of Britain’s persecution of gay men. But the release does not reveal who examined the thesis.

“Tim Hitchcock, professor of digital history at the University of Sussex, whose digital archive the Old Bailey Online contained the records misunderstood by Wolf, said the episode represented a “failure of supervision and examining.” He suggested that the unnamed examiners may have had backgrounds in English literature rather than legal history.

‘It shows that the British doctoral examining system is not as transparent or rigorous as it should be compared with other countries,’ Hitchcock told Times Higher Education. ‘At some level, a doctorate should require a public examination, but that is not really the case here — I’m not sure U.K. higher education has got this one right.’

“Hitchcock said he was surprised to see the mistakes framed as “minor” corrections. “This looks like tinkering when what was clearly needed was a rethink of how the argument plays out — if your major data source is ill used in this way, the whole argument needs to be rethought,” he said.

“Problems about relying solely on his archive — where descriptions of crimes are often only eight words long — were well-known by historians, who would generally cross-check cases with more extensive parliamentary records, Hitchcock explained.

“But Harry Cocks, an associate professor of history at the University of Nottingham whose work on sexuality in Victorian England is referenced in Wolf’s corrections, told Times Higher Education that the wording of these records was “easy to misinterpret, and many historians have done so.”

“An Oxford spokesman said a thesis is “a product of its time, and factual matters arising after its publication can be addressed separately by its author attaching clarifications or in further works.”

“The university does not have a procedure for editing a thesis once it has been independently examined and deposited with the Bodleian Libraries, unless there is a finding of academic misconduct. Errors of fact do not in themselves amount to academic misconduct,” he said.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/04/29/naomi-wolf-dissertation-prompts-criticism-oxford

Of course maybe Naomi does better research in a field in which she has no training, like medicine.

543 posted on 08/29/2022 1:19:26 PM PDT by Pelham (World War III is entering on cat's feet. )

In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Covid Injection Aftermath: Study finds 94% of “Vaccine” Recipients have Pre-Blood Clot Formations and Foreign Particles, dforest wrote:
This is very alarming.
https://twitter.com/bambkb/status/1563634666745126914
It is really bad - about 2.3% of athletes in the Big 10 were diagnosed with myocarditis when that was written (and vaccination levels have still increased pe policy since then, citing team 'competitive advantage').
The research it's based on pretends there is no 'vaccine' in use, and only attributes the myo to athletes due to Covid. The titles for the information in the article make it seem like 54% of athletes had myo but that was not true at the time the article was written. Of the 2.3% of athletes diagnosed with myo, 54% of the myo cases had no symptoms. Very bad, can cause sudden death etc.

544 posted on 08/29/2022 2:40:58 PM PDT by ransomnote (IN GOD WE TRUST)

That’s all well and good, but she’s spot-on about the civil rights aspect.

And the WarRoom/DailyClout 3500-member team is combing through the Pfizer clot shot trial records, and filing lawsuits. I’ll be celebrating criminal and civil penalties for the fraudsters.

545 posted on 08/29/2022 4:24:25 PM PDT by SecAmndmt (Cv19 vaccines are Phase 2 of the CCP bioweapon)

Well who could doubt the medical knowledge of team clot shot.

546 posted on 08/29/2022 4:33:52 PM PDT by Pelham (World War III is entering on cat's feet. )

547 posted on 08/29/2022 4:35:58 PM PDT by Jane Long (What we were told was a “conspiracy theory” in 2020 is now fact. 🙏🏻 Ps 33:12)

To: metmom; Allegra

I offer no opinions about others.

All hundreds of my posts have ONLY ONE SUBJECT,
which is MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH COVID VACCINE,
which you have none.

You should be ashamed of yourself to call me a liar
for my post about my electric bill. I went through trouble of downloading my September 2022 bill, to prove I was telling the truth and you are throwing out false accusations. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Posting my exercise experience is for the same reason.
I post it so that every one reading my posts will
benefit from how the regular exercise has helped me.
It is not chest thumping, it is helping all FReepers
live longer and healthier, so we can vote more years.

548 posted on 08/29/2022 4:39:26 PM PDT by entropy12 (Trump & MAGA are the only road to kep USA viable.s)

All they need is legal understanding to recognize fraud.

549 posted on 08/29/2022 5:00:37 PM PDT by SecAmndmt (Cv19 vaccines are Phase 2 of the CCP bioweapon)

Do you really think they will win lawsuits with shoddy, easily disproven “research” with such glaring and ridiculous errors as outlined in my #479?

https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4088573/posts?page=479#479

I am firmly against mandates. I want competent and credible people on our side. Naomi and her bunch have already proven they are not. Facts and truth will win the day, not childish math errors and very stupid mistakes like double counting. This is what happens when you “crowdsource” amateur “researchers” off Gettr.

550 posted on 08/29/2022 5:41:35 PM PDT by CatHerd (Whoever said "All's fair in love and war" probably never participated in either.)

I suppose next we will have you tell us about your sexual prowess at age 82. 🙀🙊🙈🙉🕺🏼

You sound like all those old geezers who do the commercials on FOX for those veggie capsules and other supplements.

I wonder if Mike Huckabee posts on these threads. 😉

551 posted on 08/29/2022 6:16:35 PM PDT by miserare ( Impeach Joe Biden!)

Well who could doubt the medical knowledge of team clot shot.

Or their ability to read, amirite?

552 posted on 08/29/2022 7:18:29 PM PDT by bagster ("Even bad men love their mamas".)

Well...the Pfizer trial data signal on miscarriages was 70+% with Wolf. Dr Pierre Kory calculated 80% from the same data. An Australian MD calculated 48%; not sure which data set. That is what we call “signal”. And tonight...wait for it...the British government is now advising pregnant and nursing women against the V. If and when the CDC updates their recommendation, there will (hopefully) be lots of questions. And lawsuits. I want to see the perps *flattened* in every way.

553 posted on 08/29/2022 10:28:29 PM PDT by SecAmndmt (Cv19 vaccines are Phase 2 of the CCP bioweapon)

“IMO, it’s really irrelevant whether it’s a few weeks or months, vs. years.

Even within shorter time frames, death or enough damage can be done that warrants that kind of legal action.”
—————
I wasn’t asking for legal reasons, but for medical ones. Does the body get rid of the crap and repair (or substantially repair) after a period of time, or not. I have asked this question in one form or another for over a year on various forums and have yet to get any kind of consistent answer (if I get one at all). Do you know the answer?

As for the rest of your response, you are, of course, correct. I don’t think that we’ll see Nuremberg type hearings - but we should if there was anything approaching justice or a concern for average people.

554 posted on 08/30/2022 5:40:45 AM PDT by Ancesthntr (“The right to buy weapons is the right to be free.” ― A.E. Van Vogt, The Weapons Shops of Isher)

I suppose the body repairing itself depends on whether anything harmful remains in the body long term, because then, even if the damage is reparable, the body will never catch up as damage will continually be being done.

There are protocols that are supposed to help doing that. Dr Zelenko (RIP) had a protocol that was supposed to help. Other doctors have made recommendations for things to do if you have taken the vax to either prevent or repair damage, so clearly some medical people think some of it can be resolved.

Probably, like everything medical, it depends on the individual.

555 posted on 08/30/2022 7:41:52 AM PDT by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith…)

I had occasion to use IVm and HCQ within 24-48 hours after diagnosis.

Observation (opinion) and questions:

You work in a hospital, correct?

If humans are anything like me, it takes an act of God to get me to go to a hospital. If I were to get the sniffles and a fever, I wouldn't run to the emergency room or even my personal doctor, for that matter. I would wait until things got out of hand, in my estimation. Then I MIGHT go the hospital.

I do realize there are a large number of hypochondriacs who will run to the ER if they get split ends and another contingent that responded to the government's fear porn.

My point being, that by the time a person is 'diagnozed' with the covids, it has already 'progressed' in some manner. This is where YOU come in.

Now imagine had that person had a bottle of good ol' HCQ, Ivermectin, and the other recommended 'protocols' on hand. Over the counter, of course. And the 'medical community had taken Trump's original recommendation and Warp Speeded THAT.

I'm very sure that those things don't work in every case and that some people would still have died, most likely people that were already jacked up from some other health issue and/or old af. Nothing, as you know, is 100%.

It is my expert medical opinion that, had this been the case, far fewer people would have died. And then subtract all those who suffered death and other bad things from the unnecessary and harmful fake poison vax and, bada bing, let's take a look at the numbers now.

How do you feel about that?

556 posted on 08/30/2022 12:52:53 PM PDT by bagster ("Even bad men love their mamas".)

To: humblegunner

I could put in a word for you, been an employee of ChapoCorp for near about 25 year.

As long as I can have Salma Hayek, I'm in.

557 posted on 08/30/2022 12:54:11 PM PDT by bagster ("Even bad men love their mamas".)

You obviously did not read my post and the links provided. Surely you are not so math challenged or so lacking in the logic department that you would write what you did otherwise.

Yes, this is a long post, very long. But unless your mind is completely closed and you are not interested in truth and facts, you will give it a whirl. I provide links so you can check the data for yourself. You should not trust me any more than you do Fauci or Wolf or Kory or any other anonymous person on an internet forum, and I certainly don’t expect you to.

Actually, Naomi Wolf claimed 44% and Pierre Kory claimed 78% - 87.5% (Kory admitted he had trouble counting).

Naomi Wolfe has her “crowdsourced project” going through the Pfizer documents and they made grave errors. These are glaring errors, but Wolfe failed to notice them when announcing their erroneous finding that 44% of vaccinated pregnant women miscarried.

Error #1: They found the page with the table listing the 11 women who miscarried in the “All Adverse Events” section. And they found the the page with the table listing those same 11 women in the “Serious Adverse Events” section. Being lousy researchers, they failed to notice it was the same 11 women, same 11 miscarriages, and added the two tables together, claiming there were 22 miscarriages — but actually there were only 11.

Error #2: They found the table listing the 50 women who became pregnant after the first dose and assumed this was the total number of pregnant women enrolled in the study, a wrong assumption. They also failed to notice that only 3 of the 11 women who miscarried are listed among the 50.

Wrongly assuming there were only 50 pregnancies, and wrongly assuming all 22 double-counted women were among the 50, they came up with that bogus 44% miscarriage rate.

So what about the 8 women who miscarried missing from the list of 50 who became pregnant after the first dose? Pregnant women were excluded from the initial phase of the Pfizer trials (a normal precaution). The eight women who are missing from the list of 50 may have been pregnant at the time of enrollment but did not yet know it. There may well be another page these “researchers” have not yet found (or which has not yet been released) listing women who were pregnant unawares at time of enrollment.

Without the missing table of women who were already pregnant when they received the first dose (which likely includes the 8 women missing from the list of 50 who became pregnant after receiving the first dose), we cannot know the total number of pregnant women in this phase of the study. All we know is that of the 50 women who reported they became pregnant after the first dose, 3 miscarried. That’s a rate of 6%, which is obviously below the normal rate of 10% - 20%.

So does the vaccine prevent miscarriages? I certainly would not say so! The 6% is low, yes, but the sample size is only 50, too small for meaningful analysis. It’s also possible one or more of the 50 women miscarried at a later date. She/they might be listed on another page not yet found or released.

Perhaps Naomi’s “researchers” will find that table and correct the error. Or perhaps not. Naomi got her “Massacre!” headline on Will Witt’s website that dupes then spread on social media.

At least this “Berberina on Gettr” who posted the erroneous “finding” that “44% of pregnant women miscarried” on Wolf’s website noted that others had called out the errors.

But don’t take my word for it. You can see for yourself, as Phil Kerpen provides the relevant pages from the Pfizer study. Here is the link again:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1559949374381244416.html

Here is the link to the web archive of the page on Naomi’s website erroneously claiming 44% of pregnancies ended in miscarriages (it has now been removed from her website). As you can see, “Berberine on Gettr” added a note that they had been called out on their errors, and gives the same link to Phil Kerpen’s analysis I gave above:

https://web.archive.org/web/20220818081812/https://dailyclout.io/pfizer-misleadingly-classified-multiple-miscarriages/

Here is the link to one of the websites that parroted Naomi’s erroneous claim of 44%:

https://www.theflstandard.com/massacre-nearly-half-of-pregnant-women-in-pfizer-trial-miscarried/

The third link in the first paragraph is to the page now removed from Naomi’s site. Well, it was embarrassing. But so much for transparency, eh? Naomi could at least have edited that page to say they are correcting errors and analyzing new data or something.

Can you see now why no lawyer in his right mind would file a lawsuit based on such easily disproved “research”? And if Naomi managed to find one stupid, gullible or greedy enough to do so, it would be laughed out of court?

By the way, you, too, can become a “researcher” for Naomi. Maybe you could help her out:

https://campaigns.dailyclout.io/campaign/item/72cb7408-b7d8-4696-a7d1-0c179d93a8f2/

* * *

Moving along to Pierre Kory. He makes a similar error, only I personally think it’s worse than Naomi’s.

Kory got his data from a table generated much later (Wolf’s appear to be from the initial phase of clinical trials before the vaccines were made available to the public), using data after the vaccines were introduced, and it’s the same as that released and published long ago.

According to the data Kory used, out of a total of 270 pregnant women who reported adverse events, 28 (or 29) miscarried (he said he had trouble counting — there was a woman pregnant with twins, and each twin had a different outcome). I’m going with 28, because that is what professional analysts who are used to reading these studies counted. So did Korey come up with a 10.4% miscarriage rate, as professional analysts did? Or as you or I or anyone past 4th grade would, given the data? Nope, he came up with 78% or 87.5% (depending on his counting).

Where did Kory get 78% - 87.5%? He used “known outcomes” instead of total pregnancies as the denominator, which is utterly ludicrous.

The page Kory used showed unique 270 pregnancies with 32 known outcomes and 238 unknown outcomes (238 pregnancies were either still ongoing, in other words, these women had not yet had their babies, or had not yet been followed up on by the CDC).

Of the 32 known outcomes at the time, 28 had miscarried: 23 reported an outcome of spontaneous abortion, 2 neonatal deaths, 2 spontaneous abortions with intrauterine death and 1 spontaneous abortion with neonatal death (28 total miscarriages). The outcome of 5 cases was reported as “pending” and another one had a “normal outcome” aka a normal birth.

Where did this data come from, and what is this jijpage about? It’s from Pfizer’s section on adverse event reports from Dec. 1, 2020, through Feb. 28, 2021 from 63 countries. Table 6, which Kory cited, specifically refers to adverse events reported in pregnant or lactating women who received the vaccine.

“The data was collected from surveillance systems like the U.S. government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) ( here ), or the UK’s Yellow Card Scheme ( yellowcard.mhra.gov.uk/ ) as well as “cases published in the medical literature, cases from Pfizer-sponsored marketing programs, non-interventional studies, and cases of serious AEs reported from clinical studies regardless of causality assessment,” the document states.”

Now, where did this total of 270 women come from, again? From the section on reported adverse events. Of the 270 cases, 146 were “non-serious”, “without the occurrence of any clinical event”. Out of the remaining 124, 49 adverse events were “non-serious” and 75 were “serious” (with the 28 miscarriages included in these 75).

So we still don’t know the total number of pregnant women. We only the total number of those reported to have had adverse events. In the US alone, over 30,000 pregnant women receiving the vaccine had registered with the CDC’s V-Safe program as of February 16, 2021. The Pfizer document accounts for reports through Feb. 28, 2021 in all 63 countries.

All we really know is that out of some unknown number (which must be greater than 30,000), adverse events ranging from nothingburger to non-serious to serious were reported for 270 pregnant women living in all 63 countries included in the study, and of these 28 had a miscarriage at the time this report was generated. Which really does not give us any truly firm figure for all pregnancies and all miscarriages. We can’t know that every adverse event or every miscarriage was reported.

All we *really* can know from this Table 6 is that, of the 270 women who were vaccinated between Dec 1, 2020 and Feb 28, 2021 and for whom adverse events were recorded, 28 had miscarriages, or 10.4%. We don’t know how many of the 238 women who were still pregnant on Feb 28 went on to have a normal birth and how many did not. So we cannot infer a universal 10.4% miscarriage rate among vaccinated women reporting adverse reactions.

Now the see for yourself section on Kory with links.

Link to page Kory’s blog post (includes an image of the document he used, Table 6):

https://pierrekory.substack.com/p/massive-miscarriage-rates-among-vaccinated

Link to set of documents containing Table 6 (it’s on page 12):

https://web.archive.org/web/20220125002422/https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf

Link to Reuters fact check of earlier claims the same as Kory’s (these began appearing in December 2021, leading one to wonder whether Kory picked his faulty conclusions up from them):

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-pfizer-documentpregnant/fact-check-pfizer-fda-document-does-not-show-covid-shot-caused-miscarriages-or-neonatal-deaths-in-all-injected-mothers-idUSL1N2U81ZL

* * *

See how niddly and time-consuming and frustrating it is to fact check all these claims?

So, we can’t believe what we see in the MSM or read on the government websites. At the same time, we can’t believe the creative math and faulty logic some of these alternative sites and blogs, can we?

So far, no reputable professional researchers have issued a report of an analysis if the FDA’s “Pfizer dump”. Nor will any until all the 300,000+ documents have been released and they have had time to analyze them. Unlike Naomi, reputable professionals don’t rush to construct something meaningful out of bits and pieces of partial data. In the meantime, we have to wait. The FDA was supposed to release 55,000 documents per month, so it should be nearing the end around now.

Finally, does any reasonable person truly believe that if 87.5% of pregnancies among vaccinated women ended in miscarriage, it could be covered up? The miscarriage rate may turn out to be slightly above the normal rates for miscarriage. and there may be elevated risk associated with the vaccines. I don’t know. Right now, we have no evidence there is elevated risk. Or any hard-and-fast evidence there isn’t.

558 posted on 08/30/2022 1:27:22 PM PDT by CatHerd (Whoever said "All's fair in love and war" probably never participated in either.)

To: ransomnote; dforest

Thanks ransomnote for your summary of the article I tried posting earlier. As far as I can tell the article only deals with those who were unvaxxed and contracted covid19. I would be interested in myocarditis research which compares student athletes unvaxxed/no Covid, vaxxed/no Covid, unvaxxed/Covid, vaxxed/Covid and the incidence of myocarditis in each group.

Here is the link to the article I was attempting to link earlier to no avail. Still can’t, however, you can copy and paste into browser and it should work.

https://press.rsna.org/timssnet/media/pressreleases/14_pr_target.cfm?id=2304

559 posted on 08/30/2022 2:28:59 PM PDT by I want to know

To: I want to know

The problem you have making a comparison with unvaxed student athletes is because most were forced to take the vaxes in order to play. That is the problem with mandates and a fake vax authorized under an EUA. These studies should have happened before ever injecting this garbage into the population.

It destroys the ability to make a comparison. Maybe that is why it was done that way.

Did you know that some testing was done and many results were blatantly lied about?

560 posted on 08/30/2022 3:00:11 PM PDT by dforest

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794