Covid cases that occur from 1-14 days after the last jab are always, by order of some higher but unidentifiable authority that cannot be held publicly accountable, counted as "unvaccinated" even when people have had 1 or more doses. Untold numbers of actual cases occurring in the 1-14-day period in people who have had 1-4 jabs are not counted as vaccinated cases. This leads me to conclude that They KNEW there would immediate immune suppression following each jab that would increase infection rates, and They made up the 14-day exclusion zone so that those cases could conveniently be blamed publicly on refusers to influence political action against them.
You are only considered JABBED 15-89 days from your last jab. (15-59 days for Janssen which is hardly given anymore in the US.) Anything before or after that window is considered UNJABBED.
What a twisted Newspeak, and it's getting weirder and weirder.
Btw, Australia keeps pushing the jabs for kids, like there's no tomorrow, now that includes flu vax. "Vaccines are safe and effective" the expert interview on Sky TV has proclaimed, as I'm writing it right now. Haven't been watching the enemy media for a while, turned it on this morning to see what's going on as the atmosphere's been warming up somewhat.
A friend recently told me that her healthy, extremely fit 24 hour moto-cross racing daughter- in- law took the jab and died of "Covid" 10 days later.
Covid my ass. Lipid Nanoparticle & Spike Protien induced multi organ failure syndrome from a toxic bio-weapon injection, IMO.
Sorry to be so blunt, but how can that be seen any other light???
Yes I suppose she could have had very serious immune suppression and run into a particularly virulent strain of Covid, but it just seems to me that with young people it's much more likely it's the damn jab itself when they drop dead in 10 days.
And, for all the "survivors" of the jabs, I think Covid injection recipients should receive autopsies at death to examine the condition of their organs.
Especially the ovaries of young women of child-bearing potential!
I wonder how many millennials and genXers have normal vital organs now? Half? More? Less?? Or only the "toxic" batches? Who knows!
Good God. What a disaster.
We must sound the alarm, again and again and again, until we are heard all over the world.
I am always angered by the fact that even studies like this one, always begin the introduction with a statement like: "Vaccination against SARS coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) combined with contact restrictions is the only way to reduce individual deaths and thus control the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic"... even if the study in question demonstrates exactly the opposite.
Nice to see another DDS awake to the lies we’ve lived! Our profession has deeply disappointed me. We could have been a beacon for truth and honesty our last two years but our three letter agencies fell prey to everything Fauci preached.
Hi Jessica. All we can do is speak out against the vaccines, pointing out how miserably they've failed and how recent evidence indicates that they've damaged people's immune systems. Talk about the lies surrounding this fiasco--covid was never deadly enough to warrant a vaccine, not to mention mandating it for employment. Mention that our public health "experts" stupidly thought herd immunity could be achieved through this leaky "vaccine" and how they promised the jabbed that they would not get covid. In short, speak the truth; it exposes government and public health officials as incompetent, malevolent liars who should never be trusted or obeyed.
I agree with your assessment of our profession. Sadly, patient care is a very distant second to padding the wallet for many of our peers.
Also our brave scientists and doctors: Peter McCullough, Byram Bridle, Charles Hoffe, Simone Gold, Robert Malone, Paul Alexander, Jessica Rose, Sherrie Tenpenny, Christine Northrop, Pierre Kory, Paul Marick, Fareed and Tyson, Zev Zelenko, and so very many more.
And RFKjr. Naomi Wolf. Mike Yeadon. Catherine Austin Fitts. Peter Breggin. Mercola. The list goes on and on, actually.
Read "The Real Anthony Fouci," Kennedy has a long, long list of those fighting to bring the truth out and the pharma barons to justice.
I edited an article yesterday for a journal primarily focused on vaccines. It was actually extremely well written and objective (dealt with influenza rather than COVID). But there was one blanket, "understood" statement right in the first paragraph: "Vaccines are the most efficient, effective, and cost-effective means of controlling influenza."
When one is submitting, it's always best to let the journal know right away that you're on the "good" side and not one of "them." Because science.
There is a long Cary Mullis (of PCR fame) video out there where he says exactly the same thing about "We know, of course, that HIV causes AIDS" - and he goes on to say that there is, in fact, not a single paper that actually demonstrated that. He then relates how he in person, confronted Luc Montagnier over the issue and he only got hemming and hawing put offs.
For some reason, very hard to find video, I have seen it once; he seems to have been a very amusing, likable guy.
The whole "HIV, the virus that causes AIDS" phrasing, besides being annoying as fuck, was designed to shut down opposing theories and cement Gallo & Co's (and thus the USA's) position for global research funds. All paid for mostly on the backs of dead gay men while Fauci posited in the NEJM that HIV was "likely" spread through "the air" by children. So they gave him a raise.
And this was circa 1982-86 - 40 years ago - and you can see it now as a very close template of "our" pandemic - just swap out some particulars: for (the lethal) AZT swap in (the lethal) Remdesiver etc
I concur with you on all particulars except I recall one of crisis-of-this-month being posed as"transmission via casual household contact" (rather than "the air" by children) - Fauci was on all "the shows" showing suitable concern while (ostensibly) trying to dampen down sheer panic.
I thought it was in the NEJM article, but I've also seen a video of Fauci talking about it, so it might have been in the video. Fauci posited that the "casual household contact" was most likely from children to adults through the air. So it's the same things with different phrasing. At least he's a consistent moron. :)
Just a nuance. History never entirely repeats itself; broad patterns, dynamics, yes: "fear, fear, fear" was the driving dynamic of both AIDS and "our pandemic". Perhaps largely forgotten, fear was principally instrumentalized during AIDS not by "household transmission" but by the threatened "breakout into the straight community" that was just up ahead ... any year now ... but never happened so never mind - but never acknowledge error - being an "expert" means never having to say you're sorry!
And of course, they (esp Lord Fauciquar) learned absolutely nothing by minimizing the risk that the gay community faced from AIDS. Had he been more direct, perhaps more people would have taken precautions, and the stigma that he thought he was avoiding, which was actually worse because it went underground and was whispered wherever one went, would not have been so great. But oh no, the WISE ONE knows better than us. That's why no one said, "Hey, you're overweight, maybe instead of fooling yourself with a little mask, you should stay home and lay off the sugar. Maybe some fresh air, sun, and exercise would improve your immunity and your health." But that, of course, is FAT SHAMING. So what we got instead was people in their 30s and 40s in good health who faced nearly no risk at all but were absolutely terrified of COVID, so terrified that while their obese relative was in bed and could barely move, they left groceries OUTSIDE their door, rang the doorbell, and RAN. This is not some hypothetical. Numerous anecdotes exist. I lived in LA during the height of HIV/AIDS. I watched friends die as they were pumped full of AZT and were not offered any other treatments, nor, frustratingly, were any to be found. But people HAD been working on other treatments. Except ONE PERSON decided that therapeutics were bad (the same ones that are now the bedrock of treatments that keep AIDS chronic rather than fatal) and vaccines were good and only. So for my dead friends, I ask Fauci, "Well, where the fuck is your vaccine, cockroach?"
"even if the study in question demonstrates exactly the opposite."
This is not new. Those of us in the low-carb world have for years looked at studies that provided evidence that saturated fats do not cause heart disease, yet the study authors always throw in a line about "of course you should avoid saturated fat."
As others have pointed out, it's probably the only way to get published. Unfortunately, a lot of people only read the conclusion or the abstract and miss the real message.
You said it. I spent >30 years trying to teach medical students to be critical readers of the literature: Read the Method and Result sections... and form your own conclusions. But no, they only read the conclusion and become "guideline followers". It is a shame.
This also seems to be a cruel reversal of the tiresome 2020 debates about how to attribute cause of death. Everyone insisting that COVID was surely a contributing factor in almost all documented COVID deaths, must now admit that vaccination likewise is surely a contributing factor in worsened COVID outcomes by way of OAS. "They might not have died if they hadn't gotten COVID" has tragically become "they might not have died if they hadn't been injected with a leaky vaccine."
But there's one important distinction: after SARS-CoV-2 escaped Wuhan, there was never any avoiding contracting the disease. But vaccination was something chosen and enforced by policy. By human beings. OAS due to leaky vaccination is the "we could have avoided all this if not for stupid policy" fiasco that the Experts accused COVID itself of being two years ago.
I had a general conversation about "vaccine injury" with a person who managed some of the c0vid clinical trials. If you say ANYTHING negative about the MiracleVax (TM) she will launch into a tirade about how they are SAVING LIVES! Plus, there are NO OTHER options to stop c0vid. If you don't get vaxxinated, you will die. End of story. And by pointing out vaxxine issues, you are encouraging people not to take it, and they will DIE. Plus... any doctor writing about this is only out for their own glory, and is damaging the industry as a whole.
FYI... right now, she's managing trials for mRNA vaxxes for pneumonia, flu and shingles.
You're not wrong. When the vaxx first came out, she was not working for Pfizer and was skeptical. President Grandpa Pedo gets elected, she gets hired by Pfizer and BAM! She did a 180 and is now a Priestess in the Cult of Vaxxination.
It’s been weird to watch people develop a mental illness about Covid and all the “safety” measures. My 50 something yoga instructor vegetarian neighbor went from being vaccine hesitant and having normal(ish) visits outside to taking her trash out to the street while wearing a mask. I don’t even know what to do with this.
a 50-something vegan I know was (and is) absolutely, meticulously careful and aware about every single morsel of food she put in her body; come spring 2021, she rushed down to the local CVS and got "her" covid shots! Go Figure!
This!! I know so many people who wouldn’t eat a GMO if you paid them, but they lined up to become one. My own mother who raised me to drink water and take a nap for a headache instead of hitting the Tylenol was asking me why I was so “afraid” of the vaccine. We are living in the upside down.
mass formation you-know-what ... I mostly missed that discussion in the spring but spent a good 45 min with a Matties Desmet interview this week - he is on to something - that's where we are - still.
There is something called Terror Management Theory. It kind of states that when people are constantly reminded of their own mortality, they will do anything to make that go away. People were reminded of death for c0vid for a year, and I think many went crazy.
Conversely, I think people who do not watch local tv/ network news/ cable news were able to escape some of the hysteria.
it's amazing how much "orange man bad" and the installed "blue no matter who" affected otherwise sane people's views on the pHarma and non-pharma interventions.
it probably didn't hurt being paid the big bucks out of taxpayer-provided money working for Pfizer to make a change in attitude.
Hmm 🤔 at first I was going to disagree, thinking/hoping most people aren’t that way. Then I realized it’s precisely the reason I don’t like most people.
Amen. People always give me a dirty look when I say I'd probably save a drowning cat before a drowning kid, but seriously, is it really that much of a question???
It would be helpful if you were able to identify her employer, and her name. Then we could search for papers in which she is an author, and her company a sponsor.
This could be your contribution to "Saving Lives" - we would be able to avoid the next MiracleVax!
Well, this seems to work for the woke crowd. Out, shame, cancel. Rinse and repeat until nobody pokes their head up. It goes against my grain and I still believe in taking the high ground for long term sucess. But still . . . it is tempting.
I wonder what virtue these lunatics will be signalling when they are standing in a bread line as their zeal for medical tyranny continues to destroy the world? It's unreal.
They'd never stand in line. They'd wait for the day old slop to be shovelled out for them ala Shanghai and complain that it wasn't Mc Donalds or whatever.
There is no pleasing some people, as Python once observed.
wow . . . I've read a few things about pursuing more (many more) mRNA vax'es . . . but trials already ? What will it take to shift the narrative and show how much we don't understand ? My hunch is a lot more death, unfortunately.
I'm actually surprised Big Harma even bothers with trials anymore. It seems 90-95% will willingly take any drug, with no short or long-term trial data anymore. One good thing that may come out of this is we can stop testing on animals. Go straight to humans (and Big Harma doesn't even have to pay them).
I really think clinical trials will get shortened and yes, why bother with animals. Actually, I'm going to speculate a little: I know of an animal charity that is trying to eliminate the use of animals in drug/cosmetic testing and they are having success. I'm guessing what's replacing animals is 'organoids' derived from stem cells. I hope they don't come from fetal stem cells.
The person I know managing clinical trials for mRNA vaxxines for flu/ pneumonia/ shingles is pissed because the FDA has made them go back to the former trial schedule. Not quite the question you asked, but a tangential answer.
Story out today that thousands of Spanish elite paid big money for fake vax passports and to have their "vaxxed" status put into the database. I don't blame them at all, but it does show how little people actually want this shit in their bodies.
Of course she is. If I hear one more supervaxxed person say, after returning from a 3-day hospital stay 1 week after a follow-up jab, "Imagine how bad it would have been if I weren't vaxxed," I'm punching them in the throat.
Agree.. I've heard that ignorant response so many times it is nauseating. That or--"these people not wearing masks are the ones keeping the variants mutating." I am so glad I don't live where it is common to wear a mask. My family are the idiots with masks on 😆
The vax injured are casualties of the war -- too bad for them but if we get hung up on the maimed and dead -- people will stop fighting (injecting) and we will lose the war.
Interesting way of putting things. According to Event 201, that is the EXACT way that the government is going to handle things when they are forced to admit there are vaxxine injuries. "Casualties of war, couldn't be helped."
It doesn't get much press, but there are a lot of lockdowns still in China. I work with people on the ground there and they say much of Shanghai is locked down and Beijing is sort of "soft locked down". Meaning the message from the gov't is Zero Covid, in areas that aren't locked down there is the underlying threat of a lockdown if they find cases. Daily testing for everyone, backed up by a required app that tracks everything. So everyone is very hesitant to do anything . . . work, meetings, travel, eat, friends, etc.
More miserable reading for those of us with dearly cherished family and friends who were compelled to take the vax or, for the medically fragile, advised this was the best way to protect themselves.
And more and more I'm extremely puzzled by some of the most prominent voices in the anti-vax universe. I myself understood from the get-go that a novel technology rushed out before we even knew all the essentials about the disease itself was something to flee from, and I'm just, you, know, a nobody.
Why *did* Steve Kirsch get vaxed in the first place? (He never answered me when I replied to one of his comments on another Substack with that question.) I'm starting to feel he's a peculiar sort of charlatan.
Why did Robert Malone think it would be the dandy treatment for the "long covid" he thought he had? (He admires some mighty sketchy authors and that gave me extreme pause last week.)
Why did Martin Kulldorf, who I almost entirely admire and respect, think vaxing was a great idea for the at-risk elderly?
This is all some real string and Post-Its crazy-wall stuff, ain't it?
Steve Kirsch explained several times, early on, why he got vaxxed. You can probably find this story if you look at his earliest Substack posts. He did it before he had any idea there was anything wrong with the jabs. He said that he had an epiphany about the true nature of their harm when 1) somebody he knew told him that three people she knew had died after the shots; he said that when he protested that she couldn't prove causation, she said something like, "Well, all I can tell you is they got the shots and now they are dead; and 2) his house painter (or some other kind of handyman) had a heart attack after getting jabbed and the guy's wife developed a tremor in her hand right after the jab. These events all caused him to start doing research on the jabs. The rest is history--he has not stopped since then. Steve is the real deal.
It's amazing. I've mentioned before... I know of zero people in my large circle who have died of so-called "covid" and many of us got the bad cold and survived (ages 18 all the way to 81) but I know of 7 people whose lives will never be the same after taking this *experimental* gene therapy.
Boom. My wife and I are also in the zero club. Meanwhile, nearly everyone we know who's jabbed has night sweats, hot flashes, weird tremors, difficulty sleeping, and other maladies, all immediately following the jab. Fortunately, no jab deaths that we know of so far. But one suicide. 😔
Me too regarding the death stats from covid and jab.
But, lordy, I could never straight up ask someone who lost a loved one, "Were they vaxxed?"
I will only speak up about what I have learned and know first and second-hand if I know the people listening havent had the jab. I just don't want to be the person who tells them how badly they have screwed themselves.
We've "heard" of people in our extended circle who've died of the Coof. Oddly, whenever we ask about it, the person is invariably overweight, diabetic, and unhealthy. On top of that, the person sharing the info will backtrack and admit that "they don't know what he died from for sure, but it's probably COVID." Yeah. If you have gout and die from sepsis, you probably weren't killed by COVID. Just sayin'.
Kirsh did what I did. Looked at the data and my risks way back when and thought it prudent to get the jab(s). By booster time more data was at hand and I said no more.
Yeah no. Tech billionaire couldn't figure out that new technology without a long investigatory period might be questionable.
The all-caps and exclamation point junkies tend, in fact, not to be sober, more often than not. Took me a while to realize it. That creeping gut feeling.
Tech billionaires (in IT-type tech) probably don't tend to think about that. Because experimental IT isn't going to invade your body and kill you. (At least until we invent AI nanites, but we're not there yet...)
bear in mind for the AI nanites, that public disclosure of military technology in the US tends to run 20-30 years behind development and implementation.
I can’t speak for older men, but for me I got it because I was taken in by the narrative. I didn’t realize how messed up the world was, had never heard of the WEF and thought that people in leadership roles were operating honestly. It wasn’t until August 2020 and moving from Canada to the USA that I started questioning. But perhaps older generations have less of an excuse.
I can't say I'd really known anything about WEF, but lived experience has left me extremely skeptical about the field of medicine in general, and approval processes.
Though I did have my child, in the youngest years, get the recommended vaccines, I was quite hesitant about those which came out later, like chicken pox and Gardasil. But I made sure my kid got the meningitis vaccine before heading off to college, and both of us got HepB before traveling to a region where it's endemic.
I'm 72. Most of my working life required commuting on NYC subways and buses. Never got the flu shot. Had the flu twice, I think, in all those years. It's nasty but you get over it.
There's so much they just don't let ya know. The oral polio vaccine hasn't been authorized for use in the US for at least 20 yrs., I think, because it can, actually cause polio. Used widely overseas because it's cheap and easy to administer, and is implicated in a number of outbreaks. Imagine that.
Friend of mine was just telling us about how efficacious masks and vaccines are and blaming those who didn't mask hard enough or get vaxxed for everything. Such a great girl but sooo bought into all of it. Ugh. Interestingly, she's not vaxxed her kids. Yet.
That's the thing, mountains of evidence that most people can't be bothered to look at and yet listening and following the advice of "tv experts" that don't present any evidence for their statements. Ain't that weird?
You know we're in trouble when heads of epidemiology at places like Stanford and USC and John's Hopkins and Harvard are being called quacks, and Nobel Prize winners are being called ignorant and unknowledgeable while their entire body of work is ignored. I tend to think that when someone at that level and with that level of curiosity does a 180 on the "received wisdom," it might be good to see what they have to say.
The points you raise have also puzzled me. Malone should have known or at least been highly skeptical from day one, so I find it disturbing that he took the shots and then did a turn-around, yet I haven't really heard him discuss why he took the shots in the first place. Kirsch too, and quite a few others. I have watched a lot of otherwise respectable doctors tip-toeing around the shots...not trashing them entirely (although you suspect that's what they would like to do) while discussing why they aren't necessary for most people. The whole vaccine thing became very black and white to me (bad for everyone), and although I kept reading and watching, I never really found anything substantive to indicate the vaccines worked for anyone of any age. I finally concluded that the various high profile doctors that I otherwise profited from listening to were trying to get rational knowledge out there without being banished or cancelled from the airwaves. They were walking on a tightrope with what they said publicly.
I have asked the same questions about Kirsch and Malone. The bigger question mark figure for me is Alex Berenson and his crusade against cannabis and ivermectin.
The Berenson-bear is easy to figure out. Being pro-cannabis is the new trendy opinion, everyone and their mother can be a-okay with Mary-ju-ay, so to say. Hence, a professional poseur must needs be anti-legalisation.
With Ivermektin it's even easier. He wants to keep a toehold among his friends in the main-stream media community, and as Ivermektin (and other stuff like Chloroquine) was decreed "Orange Man approves, therefore evil-wrong-badthing" he couldn't even own up to talking out of his fundaments last year, ranting on about Ivermektin being obscure, not thoroughly tested, having dangerous side effects and the rest of the talking points. I pointed him to a pan-African/WHO project which ran for 20 years in 15+ different African nations, where Ivermektin was distributed and sold over the counter as a profylactic and to promote relief from the many (many!) horrible parasitical infections common to the areas concerned.
Do you think he bothered to check the links and the data he got? Aithc-E-double hockeysticks no he did! No skin off my nose, but a an who can't even own up to such a small thing is not to be trusted without adult supervision. Compare with Igor Chudoc who goes out of his way to alert readers to any mistake however miniscule he /might/ have made.
Berenson's NYT-spots shines through his adopted veneer of "Hey! I sued twitter! Hey! I'm anti-establishment and cool too! Look, I've torn holes in my denims!".
Regards your comment on SSRIs - people abusing drugs, whether they be prescription or over the counter or from the man on Lexington 125, usually arrive rather rapidly to the stage where you pop anything.
To get the buzz going, or to take the edge off, or to just keep the jitters and d-ts at bay - stands to reason then that a person already psychologically imbalanced and emotionally disturbed have virtually zero threshold to acto out in some way.
I mean, from my youth I know full well that some people just get a nice mellow feeling from dropping acid to having a puff, or do a line or two to get the party going, or put poppers up the schnozzle when doing the old in-out in-out - and some people go completeley bonkers, either sort-of folding in on themselves in some kind of Mandelbrot loop of self-loathing or totes berserk, froth included.
It's like the "vaccine" - you won't know how it hits you until you try it. Me, I'm sticking to home-made mead, wine, juices and fermented birch sap. Having seen a friend run amok starkers in the woods way back in 1988, after ingesting Psilocybin mushrooms downed with tea from jimsonweed (Datura stramonium, it grows wild here), well - ever since then I don't really feel I'm missing out. To each their own though, long as people know what they are doing and have full disclosure as to what their ingesting or putting inside them in other ways may cause, good and bad.
(And no, I've never pulled a Clinton - if you toke you do it like the Marshmallow man, you stay puffed, right? Trouble for me always was the stuff made me throw up all the time, kind of harshes the buzz.)
Love your comment.. In my younger yrs some kids at my high school were eating jimsonweed seeds and hallucinating. It grows here too. One girl ate enough to put her in the hospital then later a mental ward. I never did that myself, but tried a bit of everything else. Mary-jayne the good stuff-not homegrown-always gave me terrible freak out flashbacks/panic attacks after I overdosed on angeldust. That definitely harshes the buzz 😆
I might be wrong but, wasn't mrmectin on WHO's essential something or rather, list? Till 2020? Merck heavily invested in and advertised it until it ran out of patent.
Not sure about the year, but yes, it most certainly was and is still over the counter and dirt cheap in many places in Africa.
Here in Sweden it was put under prescription only around the new year 2020/2021, and is only available as a skin cream against scabies, excepting veterinary medicine.
The official line from our national medicinal oversight authority is that Ivermektin does not work against Covid infection specifically, hardly surprising as the committee is 90%+ funded by medical companies.
Meanwhile in the 🇺🇸 my state of Tennessee just passed a bill that pharmacies can dispense ivermectin over the counter now. The veterinary 🐴ivermectin worked for us. It helped my daughter within 4-5 hrs. I only believe something works if I've seen it work--or used it myself and it works... In my personal experiences with ivermectin it absolutely worked. It is criminal that it has been publicly smeared & demonized to the point that people are afraid to try it. It has a safety record better than Tylenol
I've seen his recent takes and have heavily discounted what he writes. In the past, I've caught numerical and logic errors in his work, but I attributes it to poor math and reasoning skills. But now I think there is some data mining for results. I still read his stuff for source material and such, but I give a pretty wide berth to his conclusions.
I think Alex is a really neurotic guy who cannot stand having been exiled from the cool kids' table and he's so raw he oozes plasma on everything, and I think he sees his direct competition in his weight class as Alexandros Marinos (to whom I grant, as the mistress of my own judgment, dispensation for having gotten the vax too), and Marinos has been doing great work on the ivermectin trail and it's making Alex sick to his stomach.
But with cannabis I think he's on to something. It ain't that fun stuff we played with in our wilder years. It's much more powerful now, and some of the crimes one sees reported these days are so extraordinarily psychotic that you really got to wonder.
I think the SSRIs are much more a psychotic issue than cannabis. You never hear what drugs school shooters are on, would be bad marketing. I know several people that cannabis has helped immensely with issues mainstream medicine either couldn't help or suggested pharma products with dangerous side effects to solve. Sure there's plenty that overdo it and it's not for everyone but if you want to demonize drugs, alcohol kills far more people. Some of the more violent episodes I would attribute more to mixing it with other things.
As I've used both on the admittedly long list of drugs I've used, SSRIs are MUCH worse (your mileage may vary, of course). Changing dosage, frequency, timing, or combination can create a free-fall. The kind where you'd do anything to make it stop.
Had a tutor in sociology who'd been a field worker for the welfare office explain it like this:
"Mental illness leading to unemployment leading to eviction leading to homelessness leading substance abuse - or substance abuse leading to eviction and unemployment leading to homlessness and mental illness."
He summed the lecture up by stating that a h-u-g-e part of the problem is the authoritites insisting on splitting hairs re: causes and effects rather than take the obvious stance that 1) no-one should be left to sleep out in the cold, 2) no-one should be allowed to go witout food, and 3) mixing chidren, families, and people with heaps of ifferent combinations of reasons in a catch-all treatment routine just ends up pushing everyone to the bottom.
It still infuriates me that all over the West authorities insist in starting at the wrong end even after a century of modern welfare - it's like "This is to be /made/ to work no matter the results!" is paramount before actual observable reality.
I've seen statements from swedish doctors looking into cannabis (ab)use here saying that the concentration of the active substances is more than 50 times that of the original plant as it was used in the 1960s and earlier.
While the amount used for a spliff is the same. It's like switching from beer to tequila but still downing pints of the stuff.
I don't think you would feel compelled to smoke off your 60s quota with the potent new stock unless you just came out of the time machine. Easier to make that mistake with edibles.
Yeah, while I follow them with interest, I keep a sceptical eye on the likes of Kirsch and Malone who got jabbed. The same habits of mind that caused them to fall for that may recur. The characteristics I look out for in Covid substackers are: didn't get jabbed, sharpness of mind/different perspectives, caution, humility, admit when they were wrong.
Malone really confuses me. But Kirsch, well maybe he was taken in by the narrative initially? Then he started seeing what was happening to friends. I think that’s his explanation.
I'm sorry but that just doesn't fly. Either you keep a thinking cap in your pocket or you don't.
I'm no genius. I've done lots of dumb things in my life. Until the last two years, I strongly believed in the principle of vaccination. I thought my chiropracter step-brother was an idiot for not having his children immunized all those decades ago with the routine schedule. I made sure to get the typhoid vaccine when I went overseas in 1981, and the HepB vaccine in 2001.
But I've never gotten a flu shot. I rejected the thought of Gardasil for my kid, because it hadn't been out long enough. There was no way in hell I was getting the Covid vax that had just been rolled out for a disease we'd only heard about a year earlier, and I have the risk factors of age and of asthma.
Kirsch wasn't as minimally smart as I am? I'm sorry but of all of 'em in the Substack Covid universe, he's starting to reek a little strangely.
IQ/intelligence is no substitute for lived experience. And people with an IQ of about 110-135 or so are the most gullible of all: they know they are smarter than most everyone they meet, and are used to that. Therefore, they do not need to be on their guard against cons or falsehoods, as they with their superior intellect will see through any such attempts from those of lesser intelligence.
Which in turn means they help fool themselves - they are so prone to thinking they have discovered a system to beat "Find the Lady" they get suckered every time.
Edited for spelling, because they don't make keyboards for men's fingers.
Not to that extent in my experience, rather they tend to over-think things to the point that they actually are slower to come to logical and obvious conclusions, than those of normal intelligence. Also, they are much more prone to latch on to non-functional solutions and ideas/ideals than normals due to their higher intellectual capacity letting them jump hop-scotch over several steps of their own logic.
So, to fool someone of that level of intelligence, you plant an idea that has so many secondary, tertiary, -ary to the n-th degree that it in reality only leads to disaster.
Being intelligent, they can reason out what is necessary to make the idea actualy work - say cash-less, always online, delivery on demand society, but due to this their belief in their idea will be as strong as they are smart, blinding them to things obvious to practical and pragmatic normals - after all, most smart people do not work with practical matters, but are button-pushing boffins and eggheads. Easy example:
That's why they design cars where there's only an electronic key system - so in case of technical failure (battery dead, corrosion of cables, whatever) you can neither open nor start the car.
Wheras a normal person would add a remote electronic system on top of the existing mechanical one.
"When it work as intended, it works much better than the earlier system" is a typical phrase of a person who has a career, not a job.
Having worked with students of IQ 150+ I can also testify that at that point, the heightened intelligence is as much a hinder as a boon - their natural thought-processes are so many steps beyond the normal they sometimes seem retarded:
"Why don't we design a system which allocates resources via algorithms set up to take (looong list of factors) into account? That way, there can't be any poverty or lack of resources and everyone simply has a resource-score based on needs and preferences which they can draw upon?"
I.e. their intelligence makes them ignore reality, most notably the fuzzy parts about morals, ethics, history and the discrepancy between how human say/human do especially.
Ok, so I'm running long as per usual but Ill try sum it up like this:
If IQ85 gives you 1 bad/stupid, 2 average, and 1 good option, and the number of options increases with one per five points, then IQ100 would mean 4 bad/stupid, 5 average, and 4 good.
And without knowledge plus experience which both are independent of intelligence (especially IQ), you can't tell the bad/stupid from the good.
I tend to agree with you. How anyone could look at easily available, mainstream information and NOT say, "Holy shit, this is a phase 3 trial of an untested technology with limited trial ARMs and no long-term harms data" is baffling. And the argument that "experts" said the vaxxes are safe and effective and fully tested as a reason to go ahead with the jab would be hilarious if it weren't so obviously pathetic.
When someone's Substack consists almost entirely of "Take my challenge! I dare ya! I dare ya!" it makes me start to think that sober inquiry ain't at the top of this guy's list.
His work has matured and has become more sober and rigorous, probably following his stages of grief. 180° is a huge change.
And, while those dares are kind of annoying and silly, they do pose food for thought. Surely there's a smaller fish somewhere that could use a million bucks.
The tone of Kirsch’s stack is less intellectual than others. And the commenters are, overall, different. I like it though, for the flair that offers. He’s more action-y, which can be appealing. I’m a skeptical and suspicious person and have gotten more so thru all this, but his character doesn’t bring that suspicion out in me—not like Malone does! I mean, he “invented” the stuff then whoops took it even though he “knew it was dangerous”??? Anyway, it’s fun hearing others’ perspectives on the writers in our sometimes tight-knit-seeming community. We don’t have to be completely in unison. Free thinkers! Open debate!
It was obvious early on these shots were dangerous to anyone paying attention and sometimes I feel angry that any good people believed the lies without seeking out good info first.
But I remember that when I had my first child, I just assumed it was proven vaccines were necessary. I trusted without looking into it. Years later, when I finally sought out evidence, I was shocked how poor it was and that the studies that would be most revealing are conveniently never done. For example, to follow vaxxed vs unvaxxed children long term and look at all around health outcomes is something they never do. They only want short term studies and only to look at the specific illness for which the vax was made. No curiosity about secondary effects.
So, point is, Kirsch, Malone, etc. made assumptions based on trusting the studies and previously accepted beliefs were good. People forget to think about what is never looked at. Even smart people, maybe especially they, overlook important considerations.
As the terrible side effects of the gene therapy become more and more widely known, it seems like the powers that be are trying to talk about it less and less. They want to let it fade into the background. We can't let that happen. It wasn't stupidity on their part. It was active malice.
It’s confusing. When I compare where we are now to where we were 6 months ago, I think that “the authorities” are much less hysterical and pushing vaccines and boosters much less. They have their standard phrases that they have to say (I am so grateful to be vaccinated!), but the sense of urgency and desperation seems to have waned. But then we have the things that you and Brahms describe. I honestly don’t know what to make of it. That’s probably what they want.
Every day I read your research & note its sources, every day I'm that much gladder I've never had any mRNA shots (age 62 & in good health despite two infection/recovery cycles - Alpha & Delta)...
It’s a compelling and worrying argument. One confounding factor, however. People with cancer and other high risk vulnerabilities may be (likely, even) more highly represented in the vaccinated group compared to those who choose not to be vaccinated.
Suggestion: not so much "meaningless", as "misleading and misapplied"...
(high BMI overall is correlated with ill health and obesity, but it's not a good indicator on its own because for example, body builders have high BMI due to muscle mass.)
We can debate the difference. I accept it is misleading and misapplied. I would argue it is also meaningless :-). And not a meaningful correlation. Most obese people eat food. So do most non-obese people. 100% correlation that is meaningless. It does prove useful in illustrating one of the many flaws with how "modern medicine" approaches problems - by defining non-problems and ignoring real problems.
Example: Doc complains that my "bad cholesterol" is too high based on an arbitrary number in a guideline. He wants to prescribe statin drugs to lower the number. Cardiologist does a workup and says my cardio vascular health is normal for a 30 year old (I'm 62). Docs consult and recommend "diet and exercise". Well 2020 did cause my gym to close and cut into my exercise so sure why not. After 6 months of "normal" for me exercise and cutting out all the food "the experts" say cause high "bad" numbers, minimal change. Another 6 months and the number is going the wrong way. Doc reads a paper that notes the "bad" number in your blood comes from your liver, not your diet. So all that literature about diet is wrong? Apparently. So he does some more tests. Then calls in a couple other experts. One a liver guy (finally). Concludes I have had a chronic liver infection for several years. Treats the infection, numbers make Doc happy.
Yet only because I said "no" to the drugs (yes, Nancy I just said NO :-), did he search for an actual CAUSE to the change occur. Had I been an average compliant patient instead of a notorious pain in the arse the drugs would have masked a real problem. Which is almost never good.
Yup, BMI is misleading, misapplied, and meaningless. You don't need BMI to diagnose poor health. Focus on, maybe, the factors that indicate health?
Perhaps. It may depend on region. While priority was given early on to the declared high risk populations, this quickly shifted to great pressures on all populations. Pressures like loss of employment, being held captive because travel requires vaccination, and the constant barrage of "your choice to not vax is killing children!" and so on perhaps equalize the likelihood. But then again, anyone who is seeking medical treatment in most of the US will have to be vaccinated not because of actual risk factors, but policy that allows denying care to patients. so that would be a complicating factor.
Adding it up, we can't really deduce anything valid from the ratio of vaxed to not vaxed.
YET, we will just stop recommending or even talking about boosters and just move on as if nothing has happened and blame all the fall-out on Covid, rather than our response.
We could hope but I don't see any evidence to support that the pressure to "boost" will subside. Here in the USA tax dollars are being spent on "public service announcements" encouraging vaccination and boosting, painting the unvaxed as a pox upon civilized peoples and characterizing parents that hesitate to vaccinate their children as abusive. I don't think the pressure (and the continued damage) will subside soon.
I am increasingly realizing that the whacko conspiracy nuts who warned this was part of a secret effort to reduce the worlds population. Seemed nuts. Not so much now. Noting that many of the people who have jumped on the 'eradicate the unvaxed' crusade are in the MMGW crusade ("carbon is poison" anti-science litany) who were also, decades back, the same folks claiming that if the worlds population exceeded 4 billion we would all be destroyed and the only way to save the human race was selective thinning of the herd - the term used was "population control" which, really, is a more honest description of what all this masking and vaxing mandates are about.
Hey Cat, i gotta say you are the best thing i read just about every day. Im not even sure if you charge $ or if this is a free subscription, but its worth a good amount and you never let me down.
My mom has beaten breast cancer twice and has been vaxxed and boosted once. So scared for her. I dont talk to her about the uptick in cancers in the vaxxed because i dont want her to worry.
So if we in a year or so compare the number of americans (to keep it simple and in one nation) killed by the vaccine aggravating or directly causing a lethal condition with the number killed in shootings, and the vaccine number is greater (going by Steve Kirsch's various estimates the number of people killed by adverse side effects already outstrips the number killed by being shot, yearly) - does it not then follow that mRNA-vaccines must be outlawed?
Or we could take Canada - "One canadian killed by a vaccine is one too many", yes?
Except that will never be possible. Because there is no way to accurately measure the first count, as this is not being allowed. Certainly not in the US. Also, if you use the number of people killed in shootings in the US the number much, much smaller than the number of deaths being called "COVID related" (orders of magnitude) and so normalization error would swamp any statistic formed.
But as a concept it illustrates one of the major trends in policy: ignore the reality of a threat, focusing on the political usefulness only. Wolrd-wide more mass murder is committed with vehicles and explosives (often combined) than any other means. Even in the US our most tragic (all are tragic) in terms of body counts have employed vehicles, explosives and other means, sometimes with firearms also, sometimes not (really). Honest reporting of these tragic events is suppressed, too, so we don't really know (unless we dig into things like LE incident reports) the means employed. Example: in California a few years ago an assailant went on a "killing spree" ultimately killing 1 person and causing life threatening injuries to 7 more. The assailant did posses and fire a firearm (2 or 3 by different reports). Only one victim was shot, and that injury was classed as "minor" (likely not gunshot but shrapnel injury from debris) ; the assailant also used a knife (1) and 6 victims were assaulted using a vehicle. The guns turned out to be the least effective tool used by the assailant. Still this tragedy is counted as a "mass shooting" (even in the FBI data) despite the facts.
We're seeing similar poisoning of the data on COVID related deaths as detailed in this forum often. So an honest accounting will not be possible in our lifetimes I fear.
Covid cases that occur from 1-14 days after the last jab are always, by order of some higher but unidentifiable authority that cannot be held publicly accountable, counted as "unvaccinated" even when people have had 1 or more doses. Untold numbers of actual cases occurring in the 1-14-day period in people who have had 1-4 jabs are not counted as vaccinated cases. This leads me to conclude that They KNEW there would immediate immune suppression following each jab that would increase infection rates, and They made up the 14-day exclusion zone so that those cases could conveniently be blamed publicly on refusers to influence political action against them.
You are only considered JABBED 15-89 days from your last jab. (15-59 days for Janssen which is hardly given anymore in the US.) Anything before or after that window is considered UNJABBED.
Only in clown world are you 'unvaccinated' when you're on day 40 and shot 2 of the vax regimen.
Exactly. It's almost like saying a woman isn't really pregnant until the date of the birth of the child.
Assuming the child is not aborted the day before.
Well, that solves both "problems" at once, doesn't it? If she's not pregnant, then clearly there's no reason to oppose abortion. 🤡
Absolutely
You'd be counted "unboosted," not "unvaxxed" within two weeks of third jab.
What a twisted Newspeak, and it's getting weirder and weirder.
Btw, Australia keeps pushing the jabs for kids, like there's no tomorrow, now that includes flu vax. "Vaccines are safe and effective" the expert interview on Sky TV has proclaimed, as I'm writing it right now. Haven't been watching the enemy media for a while, turned it on this morning to see what's going on as the atmosphere's been warming up somewhat.
A friend recently told me that her healthy, extremely fit 24 hour moto-cross racing daughter- in- law took the jab and died of "Covid" 10 days later.
Covid my ass. Lipid Nanoparticle & Spike Protien induced multi organ failure syndrome from a toxic bio-weapon injection, IMO.
Sorry to be so blunt, but how can that be seen any other light???
Yes I suppose she could have had very serious immune suppression and run into a particularly virulent strain of Covid, but it just seems to me that with young people it's much more likely it's the damn jab itself when they drop dead in 10 days.
And, for all the "survivors" of the jabs, I think Covid injection recipients should receive autopsies at death to examine the condition of their organs.
Especially the ovaries of young women of child-bearing potential!
I wonder how many millennials and genXers have normal vital organs now? Half? More? Less?? Or only the "toxic" batches? Who knows!
Good God. What a disaster.
We must sound the alarm, again and again and again, until we are heard all over the world.
I am always angered by the fact that even studies like this one, always begin the introduction with a statement like: "Vaccination against SARS coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) combined with contact restrictions is the only way to reduce individual deaths and thus control the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic"... even if the study in question demonstrates exactly the opposite.
yup. it's boiler plate to keep the grants flowing and those who skim the abstract instead of read the study confused.
Just about the only group that's shown integrity during this crisis has been the Canadian truckdrivers.
Nice to see another DDS awake to the lies we’ve lived! Our profession has deeply disappointed me. We could have been a beacon for truth and honesty our last two years but our three letter agencies fell prey to everything Fauci preached.
Hi Jessica. All we can do is speak out against the vaccines, pointing out how miserably they've failed and how recent evidence indicates that they've damaged people's immune systems. Talk about the lies surrounding this fiasco--covid was never deadly enough to warrant a vaccine, not to mention mandating it for employment. Mention that our public health "experts" stupidly thought herd immunity could be achieved through this leaky "vaccine" and how they promised the jabbed that they would not get covid. In short, speak the truth; it exposes government and public health officials as incompetent, malevolent liars who should never be trusted or obeyed.
I agree with your assessment of our profession. Sadly, patient care is a very distant second to padding the wallet for many of our peers.
I'd love to see him serve prison in solitary confinement. No one speaks to him, ever.
Also our brave scientists and doctors: Peter McCullough, Byram Bridle, Charles Hoffe, Simone Gold, Robert Malone, Paul Alexander, Jessica Rose, Sherrie Tenpenny, Christine Northrop, Pierre Kory, Paul Marick, Fareed and Tyson, Zev Zelenko, and so very many more.
And RFKjr. Naomi Wolf. Mike Yeadon. Catherine Austin Fitts. Peter Breggin. Mercola. The list goes on and on, actually.
Read "The Real Anthony Fouci," Kennedy has a long, long list of those fighting to bring the truth out and the pharma barons to justice.
The time is NOW to bring justice home.
I edited an article yesterday for a journal primarily focused on vaccines. It was actually extremely well written and objective (dealt with influenza rather than COVID). But there was one blanket, "understood" statement right in the first paragraph: "Vaccines are the most efficient, effective, and cost-effective means of controlling influenza."
When one is submitting, it's always best to let the journal know right away that you're on the "good" side and not one of "them." Because science.
Yep. We know...
The authors are REQUIRED to spout that crap else they won’t get published. The Peer Review process has been captured for several decades.
Yep. You are 100% right.
Peer review = dogma enforcement
There is a long Cary Mullis (of PCR fame) video out there where he says exactly the same thing about "We know, of course, that HIV causes AIDS" - and he goes on to say that there is, in fact, not a single paper that actually demonstrated that. He then relates how he in person, confronted Luc Montagnier over the issue and he only got hemming and hawing put offs.
For some reason, very hard to find video, I have seen it once; he seems to have been a very amusing, likable guy.
Mullis used to talk about what a moron Fauci is, and how he would keep challenging Fauci to debates and he would always refuse.
Scott Atlas has some funny stories about Fauci's stupidity, too.
The whole "HIV, the virus that causes AIDS" phrasing, besides being annoying as fuck, was designed to shut down opposing theories and cement Gallo & Co's (and thus the USA's) position for global research funds. All paid for mostly on the backs of dead gay men while Fauci posited in the NEJM that HIV was "likely" spread through "the air" by children. So they gave him a raise.
And this was circa 1982-86 - 40 years ago - and you can see it now as a very close template of "our" pandemic - just swap out some particulars: for (the lethal) AZT swap in (the lethal) Remdesiver etc
I concur with you on all particulars except I recall one of crisis-of-this-month being posed as"transmission via casual household contact" (rather than "the air" by children) - Fauci was on all "the shows" showing suitable concern while (ostensibly) trying to dampen down sheer panic.
Read the "Real Anthony Fouci" by RFKJR. AIDS looks like a preliminary trial of the technique just utilized on the whole world.
Psychopathy is real.
I thought it was in the NEJM article, but I've also seen a video of Fauci talking about it, so it might have been in the video. Fauci posited that the "casual household contact" was most likely from children to adults through the air. So it's the same things with different phrasing. At least he's a consistent moron. :)
Just a nuance. History never entirely repeats itself; broad patterns, dynamics, yes: "fear, fear, fear" was the driving dynamic of both AIDS and "our pandemic". Perhaps largely forgotten, fear was principally instrumentalized during AIDS not by "household transmission" but by the threatened "breakout into the straight community" that was just up ahead ... any year now ... but never happened so never mind - but never acknowledge error - being an "expert" means never having to say you're sorry!
And of course, they (esp Lord Fauciquar) learned absolutely nothing by minimizing the risk that the gay community faced from AIDS. Had he been more direct, perhaps more people would have taken precautions, and the stigma that he thought he was avoiding, which was actually worse because it went underground and was whispered wherever one went, would not have been so great. But oh no, the WISE ONE knows better than us. That's why no one said, "Hey, you're overweight, maybe instead of fooling yourself with a little mask, you should stay home and lay off the sugar. Maybe some fresh air, sun, and exercise would improve your immunity and your health." But that, of course, is FAT SHAMING. So what we got instead was people in their 30s and 40s in good health who faced nearly no risk at all but were absolutely terrified of COVID, so terrified that while their obese relative was in bed and could barely move, they left groceries OUTSIDE their door, rang the doorbell, and RAN. This is not some hypothetical. Numerous anecdotes exist. I lived in LA during the height of HIV/AIDS. I watched friends die as they were pumped full of AZT and were not offered any other treatments, nor, frustratingly, were any to be found. But people HAD been working on other treatments. Except ONE PERSON decided that therapeutics were bad (the same ones that are now the bedrock of treatments that keep AIDS chronic rather than fatal) and vaccines were good and only. So for my dead friends, I ask Fauci, "Well, where the fuck is your vaccine, cockroach?"
I saw this video on YT of all places and it's not long but it has Mullis talking about what you mentioned...
https://youtu.be/vaMZ4NyNCwI
It’s the pinch of incense to Caesar.
Camouflage to get past the publishing gate keepers.
I was going to make pretty much the same comment. Immediate bias shown on page 1!
"even if the study in question demonstrates exactly the opposite."
This is not new. Those of us in the low-carb world have for years looked at studies that provided evidence that saturated fats do not cause heart disease, yet the study authors always throw in a line about "of course you should avoid saturated fat."
As others have pointed out, it's probably the only way to get published. Unfortunately, a lot of people only read the conclusion or the abstract and miss the real message.
You said it. I spent >30 years trying to teach medical students to be critical readers of the literature: Read the Method and Result sections... and form your own conclusions. But no, they only read the conclusion and become "guideline followers". It is a shame.
This also seems to be a cruel reversal of the tiresome 2020 debates about how to attribute cause of death. Everyone insisting that COVID was surely a contributing factor in almost all documented COVID deaths, must now admit that vaccination likewise is surely a contributing factor in worsened COVID outcomes by way of OAS. "They might not have died if they hadn't gotten COVID" has tragically become "they might not have died if they hadn't been injected with a leaky vaccine."
But there's one important distinction: after SARS-CoV-2 escaped Wuhan, there was never any avoiding contracting the disease. But vaccination was something chosen and enforced by policy. By human beings. OAS due to leaky vaccination is the "we could have avoided all this if not for stupid policy" fiasco that the Experts accused COVID itself of being two years ago.
I would change it to "they might not have died if they hadn't been injected with poison."
I had a general conversation about "vaccine injury" with a person who managed some of the c0vid clinical trials. If you say ANYTHING negative about the MiracleVax (TM) she will launch into a tirade about how they are SAVING LIVES! Plus, there are NO OTHER options to stop c0vid. If you don't get vaxxinated, you will die. End of story. And by pointing out vaxxine issues, you are encouraging people not to take it, and they will DIE. Plus... any doctor writing about this is only out for their own glory, and is damaging the industry as a whole.
FYI... right now, she's managing trials for mRNA vaxxes for pneumonia, flu and shingles.
sounds like the industry picked an excellent shill to run those trials.
You're not wrong. When the vaxx first came out, she was not working for Pfizer and was skeptical. President Grandpa Pedo gets elected, she gets hired by Pfizer and BAM! She did a 180 and is now a Priestess in the Cult of Vaxxination.
It’s been weird to watch people develop a mental illness about Covid and all the “safety” measures. My 50 something yoga instructor vegetarian neighbor went from being vaccine hesitant and having normal(ish) visits outside to taking her trash out to the street while wearing a mask. I don’t even know what to do with this.
a 50-something vegan I know was (and is) absolutely, meticulously careful and aware about every single morsel of food she put in her body; come spring 2021, she rushed down to the local CVS and got "her" covid shots! Go Figure!
My pregnant DiL very careful what she was putting in her mouth felt she had to get dbl vaxxed to feel safe. I'm the silly one without PhD in teaching.
This!! I know so many people who wouldn’t eat a GMO if you paid them, but they lined up to become one. My own mother who raised me to drink water and take a nap for a headache instead of hitting the Tylenol was asking me why I was so “afraid” of the vaccine. We are living in the upside down.
mass formation you-know-what ... I mostly missed that discussion in the spring but spent a good 45 min with a Matties Desmet interview this week - he is on to something - that's where we are - still.
There is something called Terror Management Theory. It kind of states that when people are constantly reminded of their own mortality, they will do anything to make that go away. People were reminded of death for c0vid for a year, and I think many went crazy.
Conversely, I think people who do not watch local tv/ network news/ cable news were able to escape some of the hysteria.
Some folks will do ANYTHING for money.
it's amazing how much "orange man bad" and the installed "blue no matter who" affected otherwise sane people's views on the pHarma and non-pharma interventions.
it probably didn't hurt being paid the big bucks out of taxpayer-provided money working for Pfizer to make a change in attitude.
Well she's getting paid, probably handsomely. Money trumps ethics/truth any day for most people.
Hmm 🤔 at first I was going to disagree, thinking/hoping most people aren’t that way. Then I realized it’s precisely the reason I don’t like most people.
Amen. People always give me a dirty look when I say I'd probably save a drowning cat before a drowning kid, but seriously, is it really that much of a question???
It would be helpful if you were able to identify her employer, and her name. Then we could search for papers in which she is an author, and her company a sponsor.
This could be your contribution to "Saving Lives" - we would be able to avoid the next MiracleVax!
Well, this seems to work for the woke crowd. Out, shame, cancel. Rinse and repeat until nobody pokes their head up. It goes against my grain and I still believe in taking the high ground for long term sucess. But still . . . it is tempting.
It seems like the woke crowd are obsessive with virtue signaling...no matter what the cause.
I wonder what virtue these lunatics will be signalling when they are standing in a bread line as their zeal for medical tyranny continues to destroy the world? It's unreal.
They'd never stand in line. They'd wait for the day old slop to be shovelled out for them ala Shanghai and complain that it wasn't Mc Donalds or whatever.
There is no pleasing some people, as Python once observed.
wow . . . I've read a few things about pursuing more (many more) mRNA vax'es . . . but trials already ? What will it take to shift the narrative and show how much we don't understand ? My hunch is a lot more death, unfortunately.
I'm actually surprised Big Harma even bothers with trials anymore. It seems 90-95% will willingly take any drug, with no short or long-term trial data anymore. One good thing that may come out of this is we can stop testing on animals. Go straight to humans (and Big Harma doesn't even have to pay them).
It's only fair to say that would change if the main sewerage media was engaging in journalism.
At least you know which ad agency to use. Whoever THOSE GUYS are using.
I really think clinical trials will get shortened and yes, why bother with animals. Actually, I'm going to speculate a little: I know of an animal charity that is trying to eliminate the use of animals in drug/cosmetic testing and they are having success. I'm guessing what's replacing animals is 'organoids' derived from stem cells. I hope they don't come from fetal stem cells.
Anyone have any info about this?
The person I know managing clinical trials for mRNA vaxxines for flu/ pneumonia/ shingles is pissed because the FDA has made them go back to the former trial schedule. Not quite the question you asked, but a tangential answer.
In this short video (5 minutes) dr. Malone states what you've just said.
https://drtrozzi.org/2022/06/01/dr-robert-malone-mrna-wef-deception-fascism-action/
Thanks for this. And yeah, the tech is just a long way from being ready, as we've proven via a vast global trial.
You call them phase 3 trials. We call them miracle cures. 🤣
How come there a hundreds of them in CDC unvaccinated?
WH, Congress, FDA, dr Mengele himself I'm sure, Schizer, Albert B...
And we know that they're utilising mrmectin and such.
The same old story, rules for you but not me, perhaps with a few twists.
Story out today that thousands of Spanish elite paid big money for fake vax passports and to have their "vaxxed" status put into the database. I don't blame them at all, but it does show how little people actually want this shit in their bodies.
People will sell their souls to get gain and fame. Looks like she has sold out.
Of course she is. If I hear one more supervaxxed person say, after returning from a 3-day hospital stay 1 week after a follow-up jab, "Imagine how bad it would have been if I weren't vaxxed," I'm punching them in the throat.
Agree.. I've heard that ignorant response so many times it is nauseating. That or--"these people not wearing masks are the ones keeping the variants mutating." I am so glad I don't live where it is common to wear a mask. My family are the idiots with masks on 😆
Sounds like you're talking about a former friend of mine. I say former because she is drunk on the covid kool aid and has been for some time.
For the CovIDIOTS this is war.
The vax injured are casualties of the war -- too bad for them but if we get hung up on the maimed and dead -- people will stop fighting (injecting) and we will lose the war.
They truly are MOREONS
Interesting way of putting things. According to Event 201, that is the EXACT way that the government is going to handle things when they are forced to admit there are vaxxine injuries. "Casualties of war, couldn't be helped."
Holy yikes Batman. I’m sure she’s a nice human otherwise, but sheesh😬🤦🏼♀️.
It doesn't get much press, but there are a lot of lockdowns still in China. I work with people on the ground there and they say much of Shanghai is locked down and Beijing is sort of "soft locked down". Meaning the message from the gov't is Zero Covid, in areas that aren't locked down there is the underlying threat of a lockdown if they find cases. Daily testing for everyone, backed up by a required app that tracks everything. So everyone is very hesitant to do anything . . . work, meetings, travel, eat, friends, etc.
More miserable reading for those of us with dearly cherished family and friends who were compelled to take the vax or, for the medically fragile, advised this was the best way to protect themselves.
And more and more I'm extremely puzzled by some of the most prominent voices in the anti-vax universe. I myself understood from the get-go that a novel technology rushed out before we even knew all the essentials about the disease itself was something to flee from, and I'm just, you, know, a nobody.
Why *did* Steve Kirsch get vaxed in the first place? (He never answered me when I replied to one of his comments on another Substack with that question.) I'm starting to feel he's a peculiar sort of charlatan.
Why did Robert Malone think it would be the dandy treatment for the "long covid" he thought he had? (He admires some mighty sketchy authors and that gave me extreme pause last week.)
Why did Martin Kulldorf, who I almost entirely admire and respect, think vaxing was a great idea for the at-risk elderly?
This is all some real string and Post-Its crazy-wall stuff, ain't it?
Steve Kirsch explained several times, early on, why he got vaxxed. You can probably find this story if you look at his earliest Substack posts. He did it before he had any idea there was anything wrong with the jabs. He said that he had an epiphany about the true nature of their harm when 1) somebody he knew told him that three people she knew had died after the shots; he said that when he protested that she couldn't prove causation, she said something like, "Well, all I can tell you is they got the shots and now they are dead; and 2) his house painter (or some other kind of handyman) had a heart attack after getting jabbed and the guy's wife developed a tremor in her hand right after the jab. These events all caused him to start doing research on the jabs. The rest is history--he has not stopped since then. Steve is the real deal.
It's amazing. I've mentioned before... I know of zero people in my large circle who have died of so-called "covid" and many of us got the bad cold and survived (ages 18 all the way to 81) but I know of 7 people whose lives will never be the same after taking this *experimental* gene therapy.
Boom. My wife and I are also in the zero club. Meanwhile, nearly everyone we know who's jabbed has night sweats, hot flashes, weird tremors, difficulty sleeping, and other maladies, all immediately following the jab. Fortunately, no jab deaths that we know of so far. But one suicide. 😔
Me too regarding the death stats from covid and jab.
But, lordy, I could never straight up ask someone who lost a loved one, "Were they vaxxed?"
I will only speak up about what I have learned and know first and second-hand if I know the people listening havent had the jab. I just don't want to be the person who tells them how badly they have screwed themselves.
We've "heard" of people in our extended circle who've died of the Coof. Oddly, whenever we ask about it, the person is invariably overweight, diabetic, and unhealthy. On top of that, the person sharing the info will backtrack and admit that "they don't know what he died from for sure, but it's probably COVID." Yeah. If you have gout and die from sepsis, you probably weren't killed by COVID. Just sayin'.
Kirsh did what I did. Looked at the data and my risks way back when and thought it prudent to get the jab(s). By booster time more data was at hand and I said no more.
Yeah no. Tech billionaire couldn't figure out that new technology without a long investigatory period might be questionable.
The all-caps and exclamation point junkies tend, in fact, not to be sober, more often than not. Took me a while to realize it. That creeping gut feeling.
Tech billionaires (in IT-type tech) probably don't tend to think about that. Because experimental IT isn't going to invade your body and kill you. (At least until we invent AI nanites, but we're not there yet...)
bear in mind for the AI nanites, that public disclosure of military technology in the US tends to run 20-30 years behind development and implementation.
The painter/handyman's wife was harmed (not Steve's wife, if he has one). I think she also worked for Steve, perhaps as a house cleaner?
I can’t speak for older men, but for me I got it because I was taken in by the narrative. I didn’t realize how messed up the world was, had never heard of the WEF and thought that people in leadership roles were operating honestly. It wasn’t until August 2020 and moving from Canada to the USA that I started questioning. But perhaps older generations have less of an excuse.
I can't say I'd really known anything about WEF, but lived experience has left me extremely skeptical about the field of medicine in general, and approval processes.
Though I did have my child, in the youngest years, get the recommended vaccines, I was quite hesitant about those which came out later, like chicken pox and Gardasil. But I made sure my kid got the meningitis vaccine before heading off to college, and both of us got HepB before traveling to a region where it's endemic.
I'm 72. Most of my working life required commuting on NYC subways and buses. Never got the flu shot. Had the flu twice, I think, in all those years. It's nasty but you get over it.
There's so much they just don't let ya know. The oral polio vaccine hasn't been authorized for use in the US for at least 20 yrs., I think, because it can, actually cause polio. Used widely overseas because it's cheap and easy to administer, and is implicated in a number of outbreaks. Imagine that.
Friend of mine was just telling us about how efficacious masks and vaccines are and blaming those who didn't mask hard enough or get vaxxed for everything. Such a great girl but sooo bought into all of it. Ugh. Interestingly, she's not vaxxed her kids. Yet.
So much I think is peacock display of Officially Approved Viewpoints but she gave herself that wiggle room with her kids, huh?
That's the thing, mountains of evidence that most people can't be bothered to look at and yet listening and following the advice of "tv experts" that don't present any evidence for their statements. Ain't that weird?
You know we're in trouble when heads of epidemiology at places like Stanford and USC and John's Hopkins and Harvard are being called quacks, and Nobel Prize winners are being called ignorant and unknowledgeable while their entire body of work is ignored. I tend to think that when someone at that level and with that level of curiosity does a 180 on the "received wisdom," it might be good to see what they have to say.
The points you raise have also puzzled me. Malone should have known or at least been highly skeptical from day one, so I find it disturbing that he took the shots and then did a turn-around, yet I haven't really heard him discuss why he took the shots in the first place. Kirsch too, and quite a few others. I have watched a lot of otherwise respectable doctors tip-toeing around the shots...not trashing them entirely (although you suspect that's what they would like to do) while discussing why they aren't necessary for most people. The whole vaccine thing became very black and white to me (bad for everyone), and although I kept reading and watching, I never really found anything substantive to indicate the vaccines worked for anyone of any age. I finally concluded that the various high profile doctors that I otherwise profited from listening to were trying to get rational knowledge out there without being banished or cancelled from the airwaves. They were walking on a tightrope with what they said publicly.
Yep. If you are not pro or slightly positive on vaccines, you are by default an antivaxxer.
Malone said he had long covid and at the time it was thought that the jabs would help with that.
I have asked the same questions about Kirsch and Malone. The bigger question mark figure for me is Alex Berenson and his crusade against cannabis and ivermectin.
The Berenson-bear is easy to figure out. Being pro-cannabis is the new trendy opinion, everyone and their mother can be a-okay with Mary-ju-ay, so to say. Hence, a professional poseur must needs be anti-legalisation.
With Ivermektin it's even easier. He wants to keep a toehold among his friends in the main-stream media community, and as Ivermektin (and other stuff like Chloroquine) was decreed "Orange Man approves, therefore evil-wrong-badthing" he couldn't even own up to talking out of his fundaments last year, ranting on about Ivermektin being obscure, not thoroughly tested, having dangerous side effects and the rest of the talking points. I pointed him to a pan-African/WHO project which ran for 20 years in 15+ different African nations, where Ivermektin was distributed and sold over the counter as a profylactic and to promote relief from the many (many!) horrible parasitical infections common to the areas concerned.
Do you think he bothered to check the links and the data he got? Aithc-E-double hockeysticks no he did! No skin off my nose, but a an who can't even own up to such a small thing is not to be trusted without adult supervision. Compare with Igor Chudoc who goes out of his way to alert readers to any mistake however miniscule he /might/ have made.
Berenson's NYT-spots shines through his adopted veneer of "Hey! I sued twitter! Hey! I'm anti-establishment and cool too! Look, I've torn holes in my denims!".
Igor is great. And so is your hot take.
Thanks for that.
Regards your comment on SSRIs - people abusing drugs, whether they be prescription or over the counter or from the man on Lexington 125, usually arrive rather rapidly to the stage where you pop anything.
To get the buzz going, or to take the edge off, or to just keep the jitters and d-ts at bay - stands to reason then that a person already psychologically imbalanced and emotionally disturbed have virtually zero threshold to acto out in some way.
I mean, from my youth I know full well that some people just get a nice mellow feeling from dropping acid to having a puff, or do a line or two to get the party going, or put poppers up the schnozzle when doing the old in-out in-out - and some people go completeley bonkers, either sort-of folding in on themselves in some kind of Mandelbrot loop of self-loathing or totes berserk, froth included.
It's like the "vaccine" - you won't know how it hits you until you try it. Me, I'm sticking to home-made mead, wine, juices and fermented birch sap. Having seen a friend run amok starkers in the woods way back in 1988, after ingesting Psilocybin mushrooms downed with tea from jimsonweed (Datura stramonium, it grows wild here), well - ever since then I don't really feel I'm missing out. To each their own though, long as people know what they are doing and have full disclosure as to what their ingesting or putting inside them in other ways may cause, good and bad.
(And no, I've never pulled a Clinton - if you toke you do it like the Marshmallow man, you stay puffed, right? Trouble for me always was the stuff made me throw up all the time, kind of harshes the buzz.)
Datura, damn.
Love your comment.. In my younger yrs some kids at my high school were eating jimsonweed seeds and hallucinating. It grows here too. One girl ate enough to put her in the hospital then later a mental ward. I never did that myself, but tried a bit of everything else. Mary-jayne the good stuff-not homegrown-always gave me terrible freak out flashbacks/panic attacks after I overdosed on angeldust. That definitely harshes the buzz 😆
Angeldust - the Horror, the Horror... Seen one guy do it once, never want to see that again.
On the other hand, now I have to listen to the great Slayer song of the same name again!
I might be wrong but, wasn't mrmectin on WHO's essential something or rather, list? Till 2020? Merck heavily invested in and advertised it until it ran out of patent.
Not sure about the year, but yes, it most certainly was and is still over the counter and dirt cheap in many places in Africa.
Here in Sweden it was put under prescription only around the new year 2020/2021, and is only available as a skin cream against scabies, excepting veterinary medicine.
The official line from our national medicinal oversight authority is that Ivermektin does not work against Covid infection specifically, hardly surprising as the committee is 90%+ funded by medical companies.
Meanwhile in the 🇺🇸 my state of Tennessee just passed a bill that pharmacies can dispense ivermectin over the counter now. The veterinary 🐴ivermectin worked for us. It helped my daughter within 4-5 hrs. I only believe something works if I've seen it work--or used it myself and it works... In my personal experiences with ivermectin it absolutely worked. It is criminal that it has been publicly smeared & demonized to the point that people are afraid to try it. It has a safety record better than Tylenol
Agree re AB too.
I've seen his recent takes and have heavily discounted what he writes. In the past, I've caught numerical and logic errors in his work, but I attributes it to poor math and reasoning skills. But now I think there is some data mining for results. I still read his stuff for source material and such, but I give a pretty wide berth to his conclusions.
I think Alex is a really neurotic guy who cannot stand having been exiled from the cool kids' table and he's so raw he oozes plasma on everything, and I think he sees his direct competition in his weight class as Alexandros Marinos (to whom I grant, as the mistress of my own judgment, dispensation for having gotten the vax too), and Marinos has been doing great work on the ivermectin trail and it's making Alex sick to his stomach.
But with cannabis I think he's on to something. It ain't that fun stuff we played with in our wilder years. It's much more powerful now, and some of the crimes one sees reported these days are so extraordinarily psychotic that you really got to wonder.
I think the SSRIs are much more a psychotic issue than cannabis. You never hear what drugs school shooters are on, would be bad marketing. I know several people that cannabis has helped immensely with issues mainstream medicine either couldn't help or suggested pharma products with dangerous side effects to solve. Sure there's plenty that overdo it and it's not for everyone but if you want to demonize drugs, alcohol kills far more people. Some of the more violent episodes I would attribute more to mixing it with other things.
I'm happy to demonize all of 'em.
As I've used both on the admittedly long list of drugs I've used, SSRIs are MUCH worse (your mileage may vary, of course). Changing dosage, frequency, timing, or combination can create a free-fall. The kind where you'd do anything to make it stop.
I would pose the question of: correlation or causation? (Or, which direction of causation?)
Do SSRIs cause people to be crazy, or do crazy people go to the doctor and the doctor says "oh, I'll give you drugs for that"?
Mathematician's answer I'm afraid: "Yes".
Had a tutor in sociology who'd been a field worker for the welfare office explain it like this:
"Mental illness leading to unemployment leading to eviction leading to homelessness leading substance abuse - or substance abuse leading to eviction and unemployment leading to homlessness and mental illness."
He summed the lecture up by stating that a h-u-g-e part of the problem is the authoritites insisting on splitting hairs re: causes and effects rather than take the obvious stance that 1) no-one should be left to sleep out in the cold, 2) no-one should be allowed to go witout food, and 3) mixing chidren, families, and people with heaps of ifferent combinations of reasons in a catch-all treatment routine just ends up pushing everyone to the bottom.
It still infuriates me that all over the West authorities insist in starting at the wrong end even after a century of modern welfare - it's like "This is to be /made/ to work no matter the results!" is paramount before actual observable reality.
I've seen statements from swedish doctors looking into cannabis (ab)use here saying that the concentration of the active substances is more than 50 times that of the original plant as it was used in the 1960s and earlier.
While the amount used for a spliff is the same. It's like switching from beer to tequila but still downing pints of the stuff.
I don't think you would feel compelled to smoke off your 60s quota with the potent new stock unless you just came out of the time machine. Easier to make that mistake with edibles.
Why his stance against cannabis? Because his wife is a psychiatrist who deals with the cannabis-damaged on a daily basis.
Yeah, while I follow them with interest, I keep a sceptical eye on the likes of Kirsch and Malone who got jabbed. The same habits of mind that caused them to fall for that may recur. The characteristics I look out for in Covid substackers are: didn't get jabbed, sharpness of mind/different perspectives, caution, humility, admit when they were wrong.
And cats. They have to like cats. Especially bad ones.
100%.
Malone really confuses me. But Kirsch, well maybe he was taken in by the narrative initially? Then he started seeing what was happening to friends. I think that’s his explanation.
I'm sorry but that just doesn't fly. Either you keep a thinking cap in your pocket or you don't.
I'm no genius. I've done lots of dumb things in my life. Until the last two years, I strongly believed in the principle of vaccination. I thought my chiropracter step-brother was an idiot for not having his children immunized all those decades ago with the routine schedule. I made sure to get the typhoid vaccine when I went overseas in 1981, and the HepB vaccine in 2001.
But I've never gotten a flu shot. I rejected the thought of Gardasil for my kid, because it hadn't been out long enough. There was no way in hell I was getting the Covid vax that had just been rolled out for a disease we'd only heard about a year earlier, and I have the risk factors of age and of asthma.
Kirsch wasn't as minimally smart as I am? I'm sorry but of all of 'em in the Substack Covid universe, he's starting to reek a little strangely.
IQ/intelligence is no substitute for lived experience. And people with an IQ of about 110-135 or so are the most gullible of all: they know they are smarter than most everyone they meet, and are used to that. Therefore, they do not need to be on their guard against cons or falsehoods, as they with their superior intellect will see through any such attempts from those of lesser intelligence.
Which in turn means they help fool themselves - they are so prone to thinking they have discovered a system to beat "Find the Lady" they get suckered every time.
Edited for spelling, because they don't make keyboards for men's fingers.
That's it Rikard, that's it. Basically they think themselves
so smart that even a hint of contemplating of ever being wrong is beyond their cognition.
"You don't know what you are talking about!"
----Anthony "Mengele" Fauci
I sure been learning that on my little life's journey.
Not to that extent in my experience, rather they tend to over-think things to the point that they actually are slower to come to logical and obvious conclusions, than those of normal intelligence. Also, they are much more prone to latch on to non-functional solutions and ideas/ideals than normals due to their higher intellectual capacity letting them jump hop-scotch over several steps of their own logic.
So, to fool someone of that level of intelligence, you plant an idea that has so many secondary, tertiary, -ary to the n-th degree that it in reality only leads to disaster.
Being intelligent, they can reason out what is necessary to make the idea actualy work - say cash-less, always online, delivery on demand society, but due to this their belief in their idea will be as strong as they are smart, blinding them to things obvious to practical and pragmatic normals - after all, most smart people do not work with practical matters, but are button-pushing boffins and eggheads. Easy example:
That's why they design cars where there's only an electronic key system - so in case of technical failure (battery dead, corrosion of cables, whatever) you can neither open nor start the car.
Wheras a normal person would add a remote electronic system on top of the existing mechanical one.
"When it work as intended, it works much better than the earlier system" is a typical phrase of a person who has a career, not a job.
Having worked with students of IQ 150+ I can also testify that at that point, the heightened intelligence is as much a hinder as a boon - their natural thought-processes are so many steps beyond the normal they sometimes seem retarded:
"Why don't we design a system which allocates resources via algorithms set up to take (looong list of factors) into account? That way, there can't be any poverty or lack of resources and everyone simply has a resource-score based on needs and preferences which they can draw upon?"
I.e. their intelligence makes them ignore reality, most notably the fuzzy parts about morals, ethics, history and the discrepancy between how human say/human do especially.
Ok, so I'm running long as per usual but Ill try sum it up like this:
If IQ85 gives you 1 bad/stupid, 2 average, and 1 good option, and the number of options increases with one per five points, then IQ100 would mean 4 bad/stupid, 5 average, and 4 good.
And without knowledge plus experience which both are independent of intelligence (especially IQ), you can't tell the bad/stupid from the good.
I tend to agree with you. How anyone could look at easily available, mainstream information and NOT say, "Holy shit, this is a phase 3 trial of an untested technology with limited trial ARMs and no long-term harms data" is baffling. And the argument that "experts" said the vaxxes are safe and effective and fully tested as a reason to go ahead with the jab would be hilarious if it weren't so obviously pathetic.
Yup.
When someone's Substack consists almost entirely of "Take my challenge! I dare ya! I dare ya!" it makes me start to think that sober inquiry ain't at the top of this guy's list.
His work has matured and has become more sober and rigorous, probably following his stages of grief. 180° is a huge change.
And, while those dares are kind of annoying and silly, they do pose food for thought. Surely there's a smaller fish somewhere that could use a million bucks.
The tone of Kirsch’s stack is less intellectual than others. And the commenters are, overall, different. I like it though, for the flair that offers. He’s more action-y, which can be appealing. I’m a skeptical and suspicious person and have gotten more so thru all this, but his character doesn’t bring that suspicion out in me—not like Malone does! I mean, he “invented” the stuff then whoops took it even though he “knew it was dangerous”??? Anyway, it’s fun hearing others’ perspectives on the writers in our sometimes tight-knit-seeming community. We don’t have to be completely in unison. Free thinkers! Open debate!
It was obvious early on these shots were dangerous to anyone paying attention and sometimes I feel angry that any good people believed the lies without seeking out good info first.
But I remember that when I had my first child, I just assumed it was proven vaccines were necessary. I trusted without looking into it. Years later, when I finally sought out evidence, I was shocked how poor it was and that the studies that would be most revealing are conveniently never done. For example, to follow vaxxed vs unvaxxed children long term and look at all around health outcomes is something they never do. They only want short term studies and only to look at the specific illness for which the vax was made. No curiosity about secondary effects.
So, point is, Kirsch, Malone, etc. made assumptions based on trusting the studies and previously accepted beliefs were good. People forget to think about what is never looked at. Even smart people, maybe especially they, overlook important considerations.
Then maybe they should not continue to represent themselves as smart.
Oh, it certainly is.
Which is why, at least in the UK, they're suppressing autopsies on the jabbed.
US too.
VAIDS VAIDS VAIDS! Everyone has VAIDS! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yC7HwPh6Es
As the terrible side effects of the gene therapy become more and more widely known, it seems like the powers that be are trying to talk about it less and less. They want to let it fade into the background. We can't let that happen. It wasn't stupidity on their part. It was active malice.
They just approved a third shot for five year olds. It is not fading.
Yup and still need shots for work/school and for non-citizens to come into the country.
It’s confusing. When I compare where we are now to where we were 6 months ago, I think that “the authorities” are much less hysterical and pushing vaccines and boosters much less. They have their standard phrases that they have to say (I am so grateful to be vaccinated!), but the sense of urgency and desperation seems to have waned. But then we have the things that you and Brahms describe. I honestly don’t know what to make of it. That’s probably what they want.
What stage are we at on this list...?
https://reasonandmeaning.com/2017/09/11/genocide/
did you read that drivel?
The original list might be worth it, but you could find a source that isn't so embarrassingly wrong. It's all Trump's fault!! sure Marcia
TDS should be added to the list as a precursor to blind allegiance as your neighbors are murdered.
Every day I read your research & note its sources, every day I'm that much gladder I've never had any mRNA shots (age 62 & in good health despite two infection/recovery cycles - Alpha & Delta)...
It’s a compelling and worrying argument. One confounding factor, however. People with cancer and other high risk vulnerabilities may be (likely, even) more highly represented in the vaccinated group compared to those who choose not to be vaccinated.
this is accounted for in the study balance.
unvaxx vs vaxx is near identical for BMI, cancer, comorbid (see BW graphic)
only d1 varied.
Interesting that you lead with "BMI", another meaningless metric...;-).
Suggestion: not so much "meaningless", as "misleading and misapplied"...
(high BMI overall is correlated with ill health and obesity, but it's not a good indicator on its own because for example, body builders have high BMI due to muscle mass.)
We can debate the difference. I accept it is misleading and misapplied. I would argue it is also meaningless :-). And not a meaningful correlation. Most obese people eat food. So do most non-obese people. 100% correlation that is meaningless. It does prove useful in illustrating one of the many flaws with how "modern medicine" approaches problems - by defining non-problems and ignoring real problems.
Example: Doc complains that my "bad cholesterol" is too high based on an arbitrary number in a guideline. He wants to prescribe statin drugs to lower the number. Cardiologist does a workup and says my cardio vascular health is normal for a 30 year old (I'm 62). Docs consult and recommend "diet and exercise". Well 2020 did cause my gym to close and cut into my exercise so sure why not. After 6 months of "normal" for me exercise and cutting out all the food "the experts" say cause high "bad" numbers, minimal change. Another 6 months and the number is going the wrong way. Doc reads a paper that notes the "bad" number in your blood comes from your liver, not your diet. So all that literature about diet is wrong? Apparently. So he does some more tests. Then calls in a couple other experts. One a liver guy (finally). Concludes I have had a chronic liver infection for several years. Treats the infection, numbers make Doc happy.
Yet only because I said "no" to the drugs (yes, Nancy I just said NO :-), did he search for an actual CAUSE to the change occur. Had I been an average compliant patient instead of a notorious pain in the arse the drugs would have masked a real problem. Which is almost never good.
Yup, BMI is misleading, misapplied, and meaningless. You don't need BMI to diagnose poor health. Focus on, maybe, the factors that indicate health?
Perhaps. It may depend on region. While priority was given early on to the declared high risk populations, this quickly shifted to great pressures on all populations. Pressures like loss of employment, being held captive because travel requires vaccination, and the constant barrage of "your choice to not vax is killing children!" and so on perhaps equalize the likelihood. But then again, anyone who is seeking medical treatment in most of the US will have to be vaccinated not because of actual risk factors, but policy that allows denying care to patients. so that would be a complicating factor.
Adding it up, we can't really deduce anything valid from the ratio of vaxed to not vaxed.
But ultimately, we will. Unvaxxed are the control. A control that no one in power wants around as the bodies pile up.
YET, we will just stop recommending or even talking about boosters and just move on as if nothing has happened and blame all the fall-out on Covid, rather than our response.
We could hope but I don't see any evidence to support that the pressure to "boost" will subside. Here in the USA tax dollars are being spent on "public service announcements" encouraging vaccination and boosting, painting the unvaxed as a pox upon civilized peoples and characterizing parents that hesitate to vaccinate their children as abusive. I don't think the pressure (and the continued damage) will subside soon.
I am increasingly realizing that the whacko conspiracy nuts who warned this was part of a secret effort to reduce the worlds population. Seemed nuts. Not so much now. Noting that many of the people who have jumped on the 'eradicate the unvaxed' crusade are in the MMGW crusade ("carbon is poison" anti-science litany) who were also, decades back, the same folks claiming that if the worlds population exceeded 4 billion we would all be destroyed and the only way to save the human race was selective thinning of the herd - the term used was "population control" which, really, is a more honest description of what all this masking and vaxing mandates are about.
☹️ at least omni is less virulent so when everyone catches it for the 30th time it will be bearable?
Hey Cat, i gotta say you are the best thing i read just about every day. Im not even sure if you charge $ or if this is a free subscription, but its worth a good amount and you never let me down.
My mom has beaten breast cancer twice and has been vaxxed and boosted once. So scared for her. I dont talk to her about the uptick in cancers in the vaxxed because i dont want her to worry.
I don't think I'll be getting the vaccine.
p.s. Thank you for all your hard work on this bad cat!
So if we in a year or so compare the number of americans (to keep it simple and in one nation) killed by the vaccine aggravating or directly causing a lethal condition with the number killed in shootings, and the vaccine number is greater (going by Steve Kirsch's various estimates the number of people killed by adverse side effects already outstrips the number killed by being shot, yearly) - does it not then follow that mRNA-vaccines must be outlawed?
Or we could take Canada - "One canadian killed by a vaccine is one too many", yes?
Except that will never be possible. Because there is no way to accurately measure the first count, as this is not being allowed. Certainly not in the US. Also, if you use the number of people killed in shootings in the US the number much, much smaller than the number of deaths being called "COVID related" (orders of magnitude) and so normalization error would swamp any statistic formed.
But as a concept it illustrates one of the major trends in policy: ignore the reality of a threat, focusing on the political usefulness only. Wolrd-wide more mass murder is committed with vehicles and explosives (often combined) than any other means. Even in the US our most tragic (all are tragic) in terms of body counts have employed vehicles, explosives and other means, sometimes with firearms also, sometimes not (really). Honest reporting of these tragic events is suppressed, too, so we don't really know (unless we dig into things like LE incident reports) the means employed. Example: in California a few years ago an assailant went on a "killing spree" ultimately killing 1 person and causing life threatening injuries to 7 more. The assailant did posses and fire a firearm (2 or 3 by different reports). Only one victim was shot, and that injury was classed as "minor" (likely not gunshot but shrapnel injury from debris) ; the assailant also used a knife (1) and 6 victims were assaulted using a vehicle. The guns turned out to be the least effective tool used by the assailant. Still this tragedy is counted as a "mass shooting" (even in the FBI data) despite the facts.
We're seeing similar poisoning of the data on COVID related deaths as detailed in this forum often. So an honest accounting will not be possible in our lifetimes I fear.