Lots of money...

https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/12/pure-and-deadly-greed-lawmakers-slam-pfizers-400-price-hike-on-covid-shots/

Alert: @JudicialWatch: FDA Records Show Significant Number of mRNA Test Rats Born with Skeletal Deformations - https://t.co/iBAVMRo45h

— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) December 13, 2022

https://wherearethenumbers.substack.com/p/the-devils-advocate-an-exploratory

"...We decided to explore these hypotheses for weeks 1-44 of 2022, testing simple linear regression models for world-wide data, looking at the whole time period but also splitting it into periods where covid was prevalent, declining and at a minimum (in the summer). We split the year into discrete temporal periods to separate out any covid signal, from other signals, including vaccination, to identify potential causes of excess deaths. The idea being that if a cause is absent or negligible, yet the effect persists, then there must be some other causal explanation at play. So, if there is no covid around then what is killing people? Is it the vaccines? Is it the consequence of lockdown? Or is it long-covid?

All of the data used is from published government sources....

...

What can we conclude then from our EXPLORATORY analysis:

• Clearly the surge in Covid-19 and its effect on excess deaths shows the vaccines are not effective. This looks self-evident and this isn't news.
• There is no evidence to support long-covid as a cause of excess deaths.
• There is weak evidence of the negative effect of lockdown measures (see the video).
• Healthcare quality looks to be irrelevant, but we are not satisfied we have good metrics for this.
• There is a clear signal that the vaccination programme is causing, at least, some of the excess death rate. With this data the vaccines don't look to be safe.

How long this run of excess deaths lasts is an unknown and remains a frightening prospect. Whether the effects of the vaccination programme persist we do not know, but the evidence for a plausible biological mechanism connecting the vaccines and sudden deaths is now widely accepted.
You should watch the video for the full presentation, but please bear in mind that this is Science in Action and nowhere near the final word on the issue. It is EXPLORATORY, in the same way that in 'olden days of yore' scientists and statisticians would have been all too eager to answer difficult questions requiring honest evaluation of all available evidence (it might even have been career enhancing to do so).

Wait until we see the upcoming Twitter Releases on Fauci... if the DHS / FBI allows it.

I used to read the Bay Guardian and East Bay Express on Telegraph, and later on BART ... nobody had to warn me what was "disinformation". I would see Linden LaRouche infomercials late at night on TV in SoCal, part interesting, part whacky. No one had to protect me from misinformation.

dimitrig said:

---

movielover said:

---

Wait until we see the upcoming Twitter Releases on Fauci... if the DHS / FBI allows it.

---

I wonder how Republicans feel about Snowden or Wikileaks.

I guess it depends on which day of the week it is.

---

Establishment GOPers mostly dislike Snowden or Assange. TOn the other hand, the anti-establishment populist wing in both Dem and Rep parties support their rights as whistleblowers.

The key point about the mRNA vaccines is that they are still experimental in nature, even officially so. That element will be removed in '23 and '24, when there will have been enough time and enough data built up. I think that pro-vaxers have a hard time internalizing this key aspect.

Troubling data about the relative safety of these genetic treatments is emerging, for example the fact that they at the very least carry a great risk of heart damage due autoimmune response generated by the spike protein. Those risks have compelled many countries in Europe to suspend their administration to younger people, an agecategory where the risks clearly outweigh the benefits. The question going forward is whether that risk-benefit profile also applies to older categories.

In past vaccination campaigns like the one for H1N1, many if not most of the adverse effects, particularly on the nervous system due to autoimmune reactions such as narcolepsy, started appearing only 2 years after the vaccine administration. We're currently only seeing the short term side effects of the mRNAs, something to keep in mind.

oski003 said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

The key point about the mRNA vaccines is that they are still experimental in nature, even officially so. That element will be removed in '23 and '24, when there will have been enough time and enough data built up. I think that pro-vaxers have a hard time internalizing this key aspect.

Troubling data about the relative safety of these genetic treatments is emerging, for example the fact that they at the very least carry a great risk of heart damage due autoimmune response generated by the spike protein. Those risks have compelled many countries in Europe to suspend their administration to younger people, an agecategory where the risks clearly outweigh the benefits. The question going forward is whether that risk-benefit profile also applies to older categories.

In past vaccination campaigns like the one for H1N1, many if not most of the adverse effects, particularly on the nervous system due to autoimmune reactions such as narcolepsy, started appearing only 2 years after the vaccine administration. We're currently only seeing the short term side effects of the mRNAs, something to keep in mind.

---

Even with acknoweldgment of all the data that Pfizer tried to hide, it is still apparent that vulnerable Americans (older, with comorbidities etc) that neither have had the virus nor been vaccinated, should have gotten vaccinated as soon as the vaccines were available. The data absolutely supports that.

On the other hand, the extreme efforts to get everyone vaxxed multiple times with mRNA and the marketing of bivalent vaccines flies in the face of science. Pfizer is increasing their doses to > $100 per pop, so someone is definiely benefiting from the FDA and CDC's love affair with the spike protein.

---

Partially agree to this, people with comorbidities still being a grey zone at this point, but there is no question today that the vax mandate imposed on kids and young adults in schools and colleges is an absolute abomination.

Cal88 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

The key point about the mRNA vaccines is that they are still experimental in nature, even officially so. That element will be removed in '23 and '24, when there will have been enough time and enough data built up. I think that pro-vaxers have a hard time internalizing this key aspect.

Troubling data about the relative safety of these genetic treatments is emerging, for example the fact that they at the very least carry a great risk of heart damage due autoimmune response generated by the spike protein. Those risks have compelled many countries in Europe to suspend their administration to younger people, an agecategory where the risks clearly outweigh the benefits. The question going forward is whether that risk-benefit profile also applies to older categories.

In past vaccination campaigns like the one for H1N1, many if not most of the adverse effects, particularly on the nervous system due to autoimmune reactions such as narcolepsy, started appearing only 2 years after the vaccine administration. We're currently only seeing the short term side effects of the mRNAs, something to keep in mind.

---

Even with acknoweldgment of all the data that Pfizer tried to hide, it is still apparent that vulnerable Americans (older, with comorbidities etc) that neither have had the virus nor been vaccinated, should have gotten vaccinated as soon as the vaccines were available. The data absolutely supports that.

On the other hand, the extreme efforts to get everyone vaxxed multiple times with mRNA and the marketing of bivalent vaccines flies in the face of science. Pfizer is increasing their doses to > $100 per pop, so someone is definiely benefiting from the FDA and CDC's love affair with the spike protein.

---

Partially agree to this, people with comorbidities still being a grey zone at this point, but there is no question today that the vax mandate imposed on kids and young adults in schools and colleges is an absolute abomination.

---

I can agree with some of this. However, any honest, un-conflicted attempt to monitor safety would have resulted in these vaxxines being pulled from the market very early in the campaign. Whatever happened to the precautionary principle? Do no harm? At the very least, cost-benefit analyses should have been conducted based on age and risk factors. Second, all the data should have been questioned after the Pfizer whistleblower. Post approval safety studies should have been required. Third, there should have been thorough informed consent for everyone who received the vaxxines. Fourth, Covid treatments should not have been suppressed to protect the vaxxine monopoly. Fifth, vaxxines should never have been given to pregnant women or women who breast fed. Sixth, the mandates were never justified. At best, the vaxxines are a TREATMENT preventing severe disease, not a sterilizing vaccine that prevents transmission. Therefore, the decision to receive the treatment should have been made by each individual, not by someone in DC who does not have to suffer the consequences of that decision. Seventh, once it became clear that the vaxxines were a complete failure w.r.t. to Omicron variants, the campaign to continue vaxxing should have been halted.

I don't think any of this should be the least bit controversial, but any one of these suggestions was enough to get one silenced in the online public square in our crazy up-is-down, uncomfortable-truth-is-disinformation world.

This is a complete and utter lie, yet no one in the media will call him out for it

Somehow, I doubt any fact checking organizations will refute this obvious misinformation because it comes from someone they agree with politically https://t.co/ItLkVVbiz7

— Ian Miller (@ianmSC) December 15, 2022

movielover said:

---

This is a complete and utter lie, yet no one in the media will call him out for it

Somehow, I doubt any fact checking organizations will refute this obvious misinformation because it comes from someone they agree with politically https://t.co/ItLkVVbiz7

— Ian Miller (@ianmSC) December 15, 2022

---

Yep. How can anyone believe anything this guy says if he is willing to gaslight such an obvious untruth.

Btw, it reminds me, in my earlier post I forgot the most important point of all: natural immunity. Covid survivors should never have been encouraged, let alone forced, to get the jabs. The added benefit is marginal at best, the side effects are real, and there is considerable of evidence that the vaxxines weaken the immune system. Flu, RSV are rampant and I know many vaccinated people who are getting repeated Covid infections (mild).

That they suppressed the validity of natural immunity was the biggest tell that the vaccine push was not motivated by science.

Sweden followed what we were previously taught about viruses for decades, and eventually fared the best:

- protect the elderly
- protect the frail & vulnerable
- let young and healthy build herd immunity

California knew that overweight people, diabetics, Latinos and African Americans were hit hard, but didn't plan and prioritize for these groups. They had months to educate these vulnerable groups. Heck, they didn't have enough health professionals lined up to vaccinate those in need. Harvard PhDs and all 'leading' the charge. Fail.

Google censors people including my 14yo daughter who was injured in the Pfizer Covid vaccine trial for 12-15yo at Cincinnati Children’s. I’m not anti-Vax if my kids were in the trial, I’m now “afraid” of Vax because they lied! https://t.co/uDDKNqCeXY

— Stephanie de Garay (@shdegaray73) December 15, 2022

Documentary about all the people with serious vaccine side effects that were ignored, silenced, and cast out as pariahs in an extreme exercise of willful blindness.

https://www.anecdotalsmovie.com/

http://www.anecdotalsmovie.com

Oh boy, they were misled...

"Vaccines are killing TWO PEOPLE for every one life they save."

FDA Now Says: "We were Falsely mislead by (Pfizer) " pic.twitter.com/H9uBiSR8AW

— Whyohyme (@Whyohyme1) December 17, 2022

movielover said:

---

Oh boy, they were misled...

"Vaccines are killing TWO PEOPLE for every one life they save."

FDA Now Says: "We were Falsely mislead by (Pfizer) " pic.twitter.com/H9uBiSR8AW

— Whyohyme (@Whyohyme1) December 17, 2022

---

https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-442746112813

The statement is not from the FDA.

You guys should have a team meeting and get your made up stories straight.

AunBear89 said:

---

You guys should have a team meeting and get your made up stories straight.

---

YOU should watch the Anecdotals movie. https://www.anecdotalsmovie.com/

If the regulators and authorities didn't lie and cover up the truth, people like us wouldn't have to scour the internet looking for it.

https://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2022/12/05/jme-2022-108449

Abstract

In 2022, students at North American universities with third-dose COVID-19 vaccine mandates risk disenrolment if unvaccinated. To assess the appropriateness of booster mandates in this age group, we combine empirical risk-benefit assessment and ethical analysis. To prevent one COVID-19 hospitalisation over a 6-month period, we estimate that 31 20742 836 young adults aged 1829 years must receive a third mRNA vaccine. Booster mandates in young adults are expected to cause a net harm: per COVID-19 hospitalisation prevented, we anticipate at least 18.5 serious adverse events from mRNA vaccines, including 1.54.6 booster-associated myopericarditis cases in males (typically requiring hospitalisation). We also anticipate 14304626 cases of grade 3 reactogenicity interfering with daily activities (although typically not requiring hospitalisation). University booster mandates are unethical because they: (1) are not based on an updated (Omicron era) stratified risk-benefit assessment for this age group; (2) may result in a net harm to healthy young adults; (3) are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission; (4) violate the reciprocity principle because serious vaccine-related harms are not reliably compensated due to gaps in vaccine injury schemes; and (5) may result in wider social harms. We consider counterarguments including efforts to increase safety on campus but find these are fraught with limitations and little scientific support. Finally, we discuss the policy relevance of our analysis for primary series COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

Zippergate: for some reason your copy paste left off a few items which made your post a little unclear.

"31,207 - 42,836 young adults aged 1829 years must receive..."

I think the article erroneously left off the commas. First attempt it also omitted the hyphen.

1/New study from Cleveland Clinic demonstrates that the risk of a COVID infection goes up with number of doses of the jab. See graph below. They admit that this is unexpected and they call into question the effectiveness of mRNA. What follows are direct quotes from their paper> pic.twitter.com/oQNM2eeEqQ

— Dr. Doug Corrigan (@ScienceWDrDoug) December 21, 2022

Interesting study. It perhaps explains why the CDC Director got covid right after their booster. I never got covid until 3 months after my booster.

Is Dr. Mengele running these trials?

#BREAKING: Court released data shows Pfizer ignored 97% of trial results linking higher Covid rates to vaccinated children & based their study on 3 participants to promote their 'vaccine' as safe and effective. pic.twitter.com/LoI7XAYh9N

— govt.exe is corrupt (@govt_corrupt) December 19, 2022

Class action Lawsuits?

oski003 said:

---

Is Dr. Mengele running these trials?

#BREAKING: Court released data shows Pfizer ignored 97% of trial results linking higher Covid rates to vaccinated children & based their study on 3 participants to promote their 'vaccine' as safe and effective. pic.twitter.com/LoI7XAYh9N

— govt.exe is corrupt (@govt_corrupt) December 19, 2022

---

I would invite that. Pet theories of the Right don't usually do well in a venue requiring actual facts and evidence, but if we have been lied to let a jury hammer them.

Dr. Doug will be the expert witness.

About Dr. Doug Corrigan Science with Dr. Doug


https://sciencewithdrdoug.com/about-me/

"There are many examples of the sickness of the Republican Party's internal culture perhaps none more pure than its position on vaccines. In the last two and a half years, vaccine skepticism emerged as a marginal tendency on the right. But what the vaccine skeptics lacked in evidence, they more than made up for in fervor. Advocates of sanity proved unwilling or unable to push back, and now the party is turning so heavily against vaccines that soon it may be impossible for any Republican with national aspirations to say a good word about them.

……It is a stance that runs contrary to the overwhelming consensus of experts in the field:

More than a dozen experts interviewed by The Washington Post including specialists in vaccines, patient safety and study design listed concerns with Florida's analysis, saying it relies on information gleaned from frequently inaccurate death certificates rather than medical records, skews the results by trying to exclude anyone with COVID-19 or a COVID-related death, and draws conclusions from a total of 20 cardiac-related deaths in men 18 to 39 that occurred within four weeks of vaccination. Experts noted the deaths might have been caused by other factors, including underlying illnesses or undetected COVID."

How Vaccine Skeptics Took Over the Republican Party


https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/10/how-vaccine-skeptics-took-over-the-republican-party.html

*Evangelical Bible thumper Dr. Doug and his disciples may turn out to be Sages, like Mose Allison, but for the time being I will throw my lot in with Harvard Medical School, Stanford Medical School, UCSF, the Mayo Clinic
and Dr. Andrew Weil.

COVID-19 Vaccine Issues? | Disease & Disorders | Andrew Weil, M.D.


https://www.drweil.com/health-wellness/body-mind-spirit/disease-disorders/covid-19-vaccine-issues/

bearister said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Is Dr. Mengele running these trials?

#BREAKING: Court released data shows Pfizer ignored 97% of trial results linking higher Covid rates to vaccinated children & based their study on 3 participants to promote their 'vaccine' as safe and effective. pic.twitter.com/LoI7XAYh9N

— govt.exe is corrupt (@govt_corrupt) December 19, 2022

---

I would invite that. Pet theories of the Right don't usually do well in a venue requiring actual facts and evidence, but if we have been lied to let a jury hammer them.

---

You really haven't been paying attention. This is not a Right vs Left issue. Many of the doctors and scientists raising concerns about these gene therapies masquerading as vaccines are liberals who are surprised to find themselves sharing a common cause with red-pilled conservatives. The problem is with elements of both sides of the political fence. On the right, it's see-no-evil republicans who give the Pharma Industrial Complex a pass in exchange for campaign contributions: government oversight and regulation "brought to you by Pfizer." On the left, industry capture is part of it, but it's also the authoritarians who sensor the truth and want to control every aspect of our lives for the greater good as defined by a tiny minority who are imperious to evidence, reflection, and criticism.

In a rapidly developing situation with lots of unknowns, mistakes are going to be made. The question is, are you taking into account all the risks and benefits when evaluating policy choices, and do you pivot when new data becomes available showing that you made the wrong choice. For example, vaccinating the young with mRNA was ALWAYS a risky proposition; we knew enough by mid-2021 that they were not at serious risk from Covid and that there were serious harms associated with the jabs. Many doctors and scientists who considered the risks as well as the benefits thought the mandates were a bad idea but at least it was an understandable policy error. However, laying that aside and moving to the present, how can one justify now, at the end of 2022 mandates for college students? How can one justify the constant barrage of media encouraging boosters? How can one justify the lack of informed consent? It's freaking insane, it's EVIL and it has nothing to do with science.

bearister said:

---

...

1. Are Harvard Medical School, Stanford Medical School, UCSF, the Mayo Clinic and Dr. Andrew Weil misleading the public with the information they have disseminated regarding the vaccines? and

2. If so, why?

---

1. Yes

2. Partly because they have become an arm of the Big Pharma establishment, and partly because of scientific cultural hubris as reflected by an almost blind faith in experimental mRNA technology.

Only a minority of the medical establishment is outright corrupt, or at least partially motivated by conflicts of interest. The majority are driven by an insular, elitist culture which shuts out dissenting opinions. They will for instance reject out of hand scientific findings like this one recently posted above which seriously undermine the usefulness of the mRNA vax regimen:

bearister said:

---

"This is not a Right vs Left issue."

It is a highly politicized issue and the conservative lads on this board (as well as conservatives in the country as a whole) march in lockstep (some of whom try to be cute and deny their political allegiance….but once a thread tile is posted here regarding a politicized issue, you can predict with 100% certainty what side of the issue the usual suspects will be on).

So let me pose these questions to you:

1. Are Harvard Medical School, Stanford Medical School, UCSF, the Mayo Clinic and Dr. Andrew Weil misleading the public with the information they have disseminated regarding the vaccines? and

2. If so, why?

---

1. Yes. At the very least, there has not been informed consent.
2. Read RFK Jr's book on Fauci. (Btw, he ain't a conservative by any stretch) Follow the money. Fauci's NIAID has a multi-billion budget to throw around. It's a grant patronage apparatus that rewards loyalty to the system. Pharma's clinical trials, which are conducted at all the organizations you mention, have the same effect. A perfect example is the Pharma Industrial Complex's suppression of Ivermectin. Dr. Andrew Hill was ready to write a positive recommendation on Ivermectin for the WHO, but Pharma got to him and his research was altered as a result. He even admitted it on a zoom call with Dr. Tess Lawrie which was recorded and posted to the internet for all to hear. His university coincidentally received a $40+ million grant shortly thereafter. This isn't rightwing Qanon b.s., this is a well-documented fact.

How could all these brilliant, highly trained medical professionals compromise basic principles of ethics, compromise the truth? It's a good question. I think it's a combination of group think and the banality of evil, a phrase coined by a writer trying to come to grips with the complacency of the German population during the Holocaust. The first paragraph here is a good summary. The relativity of morals is at the root of it. The thought calculus might look like this: "It might be wrong, but I have to go along with the system. The system is basically good, and hey, I'm not as bad as that guy over there, and what can I do about it anyway?" When enough people believe this, an institution becomes corrupt, which is why I think the system is rotten to the core. I'm sure you are unconvinced, but I'm equally sure that you don't read about these things from the perspective of someone on the other side of your worldview.

bearister said:

---

Well, in that event, they would be better served using advocates other than Dr. Doug and Fox News hosts.

Dr. Andrew Weil constantly challenges Big Pharma and conventional medicine.

Dr. Andrew Weil Says We're Taking Too Many Medicines - The New York Times


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/well/live/dr-andrew-weil-says-were-taking-too-many-medicines.html

---

You can't get on a Time Magazine cover and be a bestselling author at Simon & Shuster if there is some daylight between your take on the vaccine and the official one.

Dr John Campbell has been a good alternative source, he started out touting the vaccine and slowly changed his position as the results came in. He's also been a good source on the covid big picture.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCF9IOB2TExg3QIBupFtBDxg