|
HOW
Nov 11, 2020 15:19:18 GMT -5
Post by 3bid on Nov 11, 2020 15:19:18 GMT -5
Nov 11, 2020
*Crimes Against Humanity, fraudulent PCR Tests Taken To Court - Interview with Lawyer Reiner Füllmich*
|
|
|
HOW
Nov 16, 2020 5:52:19 GMT -5
Post by 3bid on Nov 16, 2020 5:52:19 GMT -5
The Covid Cult | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
This is the greatest public health fiasco in the history of the world, and the media has distorted it so badly, that much of the general public is celebrating villains and hissing at heroes. And, even — perversely enough — celebrating the destruction of their own lives and their children's lives.
Special thanks to Yinon Weiss (@yinonw) and Ian Miller (@ianmsc) for creating the charts.
Presented at the Mises Institute's "Symposium with Ron Paul" on Saturday, 7 November 2020, in Angleton, Texas.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcm8Sc8f66o
|
|
|
HOW
Nov 25, 2020 16:51:36 GMT -5
Post by 3bid on Nov 25, 2020 16:51:36 GMT -5
BREAKING: German Lawsuit Against "FactCheckers" Would Force Them To Prove Legitimacy of C0VlD Tests
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich | Nov 25, 2020
|
|
|
HOW
Nov 28, 2020 7:59:03 GMT -5
Post by 3bid on Nov 28, 2020 7:59:03 GMT -5
**A closer look at U.S. deaths due to COVID-19** November 22, 2020
According to new data, the U.S. currently ranks first in total COVID-19 cases, new cases per day and deaths. Genevieve Briand, assistant program director of the Applied Economics master’s degree program at Hopkins, critically analyzed the effect of COVID-19 on U.S. deaths using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in her webinar titled “COVID-19 Deaths: A Look at U.S. Data.” web.archive.org/web/20201126163323/https:/www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19
Landmark legal ruling finds that Covid tests are not fit for purpose. So what do the MSM do? They ignore it 27 Nov, 2020 By Peter Andrews, Irish science journalist and writer based in London. He has a background in life sciences, and graduated from the University of Glasgow with a degree in genetics.
Four German holidaymakers who were illegally quarantined in Portugal after one was judged to be positive for Covid-19 have won their case, in a verdict that condemns the widely-used PCR test as being up to 97-percent unreliable. Earlier this month, Portuguese judges upheld a decision from a lower court that found the forced quarantine of four holidaymakers to be unlawful. The case centred on the reliability (or lack thereof) of Covid-19 PCR tests.
The verdict, delivered on November 11, followed an appeal against a writ of habeas corpus filed by four Germans against the Azores Regional Health Authority. This body had been appealing a ruling from a lower court which had found in favour of the tourists, who claimed that they were illegally confined to a hotel without their consent. The tourists were ordered to stay in the hotel over the summer after one of them tested positive for coronavirus in a PCR test - the other three were labeled close contacts and therefore made to quarantine as well.
Unreliable, with a strong chance of false positives The deliberation of the Lisbon Appeal Court is comprehensive and fascinating. It ruled that the Azores Regional Health Authority had violated both Portuguese and international law by confining the Germans to the hotel. The judges also said that only a doctor can “diagnose” someone with a disease, and were critical of the fact that they were apparently never assessed by one.
They were also scathing about the reliability of the PCR (polymerase chain reaction) test, the most commonly used check for Covid.
The conclusion of their 34-page ruling included the following: “In view of current scientific evidence, this test shows itself to be unable to determine beyond reasonable doubt that such positivity corresponds, in fact, to the infection of a person by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.”
In the eyes of this court, then, a positive test does not correspond to a Covid case. The two most important reasons for this, said the judges, are that, “the test’s reliability depends on the number of cycles used’’ and that “the test’s reliability depends on the viral load present.’’ In other words, there are simply too many unknowns surrounding PCR testing.
Tested positive? There could be as little as a 3% chance it’s correct
This is not the first challenge to the credibility of PCR tests. Many people will be aware that their results have a lot to do with the number of amplifications that are performed, or the ‘cycle threshold.’ This number in most American and European labs is 35–40 cycles, but experts have claimed that even 35 cycles is far too many, and that a more reasonable protocol would call for 25–30 cycles. (Each cycle exponentially increases the amount of viral DNA in the sample).
Earlier this year, data from three US states – New York, Nevada and Massachusetts – showed that when the amount of the virus found in a person was taken into account, up to 90 percent of people who tested positive could actually have been negative, as they may have been carrying only tiny amounts of the virus.
The Portuguese judges cited a study conducted by “some of the leading European and world specialists,” which was published by Oxford Academic at the end of September. It showed that if someone tested positive for Covid at a cycle threshold of 35 or higher, the chances of that person actually being infected is less than three percent, and that “the probability of… receiving a false positive is 97% or higher.”
While the judges in this case admitted that the cycle threshold used in Portuguese labs was unknown, they took this as further proof that the detention of the tourists was unlawful. The implication was that the results could not be trusted. Because of this uncertainty, they stated that there was "no way this court would ever be able to determine" whether the tourist who tested positive was indeed a carrier of the virus, or whether the others had been exposed to it.
Sshhh – don’t tell anyone
It is a sad indictment of our mainstream media that such a landmark ruling, of such obvious and pressing international importance, has been roundly ignored. If one were making (flimsy) excuses for them, one could say that the case escaped the notice of most science editors because it has been published in Portuguese. But there is a full English translation of the appeal, and alternative media managed to pick it up.
And it isn’t as if Portugal is some remote, mysterious nation where news is unreliable or whose judges are suspect – this is a western EU country with a large population and a similar legal system to many other parts of Europe. And it is not the only country whose institutions are clashing with received wisdom on Covid. Finland’s national health authority has disputed the WHO’s recommendation to test as many people as possible for coronavirus, saying it would be a waste of taxpayer’s money, while poorer South East Asian countries are holding off on ordering vaccines, citing an improper use of finite resources.
Testing, especially PCR testing, is the basis for the entire house of cards of Covid restrictions that are wreaking havoc worldwide. From testing comes case numbers. From case numbers come the ‘R number,’ the rate at which a carrier infects others. From the ‘dreaded’ R number comes the lockdowns and the restrictions, such as England’s new and baffling tiered restrictions that come into force next week.
The daily barrage of statistics is familiar to us all by this point, but as time goes on the evidence that something may be deeply amiss with the whole foundation of our reaction to this pandemic – the testing regime – continues to mount.
www.rt.com/op-ed/507937-covid-pcr-test-fail/
|
|
|
HOW
Dec 5, 2020 20:38:57 GMT -5
Post by 3bid on Dec 5, 2020 20:38:57 GMT -5
"The Sunday, November 4, 1979 broadcast from the CBS investigative news program 60 Minutes on government propaganda around the 1976 swine flu scare. tinyurl.com/y3c6tgbb
|
|
|
HOW
Jan 18, 2021 15:00:05 GMT -5
Post by 3bid on Jan 18, 2021 15:00:05 GMT -5
Hacked emails allegedly detail how EU drug regulator was pressured to approve Pfizer jab despite ‘problems’ with the vaccine
18 Jan, 2021 An alleged cache of email exchanges between EU officials and the European Medicines Agency show that the drug regulator was uncomfortable about fast-tracking approval for the Pfizer and Moderna Covid jabs, Le Monde has reported. [...] Some of the “discussions” appear to have been less than congenial. For example, in a document dated November 19, a senior EMA official described a “rather tense, sometimes even a little unpleasant” conference call with the European Commission regarding the review process for the drugs. The official said he felt there was a clear “expectation” that the vaccines would be approved. A day later, the same individual had an exchange with the Danish Medicines Agency in which he expressed surprise that Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, had announced that the Moderna and Pfizer jabs could receive the green light before the end of the year. There are still problems with both,” the unnamed EMA official noted in the leaked correspondence. According to Le Monde, the hacked documents primarily detail issues that the EMA had with the Pfizer/BioNTech drug. The regulator apparently had three “major issues” with the vaccine: certain manufacturing sites used for its production had not yet been inspected, data on batches produced for commercial use were still missing, and, most importantly, available data revealed qualitative differences between the commercial batches and those used during clinical trials. The EMA expressed particular concern about the last point, noting that mass production had decreased the purity of the RNA contained in the vaccine. The Pfizer jab uses a mRNA strand, a sequence of molecules that tell cells what to ‘build’ in order to produce a disease-specific antigen. The EU drug regulator signaled that it was worried that less rigorous manufacturing methods would make the vaccine less effective and safe. However, Pfizer appears to have agreed to make necessary adjustments in order to meet the EMA’s standards. Despite its hesitancy, it appears the EMA understood that it was under a clear deadline. In an email exchange between colleagues at the agency, one employee said the EMA needs to “accelerate the process to align [with other agencies],” and risks facing “questions and criticisms” from Brussels, the media and the general public if it did not fast-track approval. The Pfizer jab was granted approval by the EU on December 21, while the Moderna variant was given the go-ahead earlier this month. Since then, numerous reports have emerged of both drugs being linked to adverse effects in countries around the world, prompting investigations by health authorities. www.rt.com/news/512844-eu-approval-pressure-pfizer-covid-vaccine/Woman who suffered convulsions after taking Pfizer Covid jab being screened for permanent neurological damage
18 Jan, 2021 ---> video: www.facebook.com/brant.griner.7/videos/902104703860143/After a video of his mother’s condition went viral, the son of a woman who was hospitalized after receiving Pfizer’s Covid jab told RT that, even though he was not an anti-vaxxer, he had serious doubts about the drug’s safety. Brant Griner issued an appeal on Facebook last week, after his mother began experiencing serious medical issues several days after taking the vaccine. In a now-viral post, Griner shared a video of his mother shaking uncontrollably as she attempted to walk, using nearby walls and a door to support herself as she inched forward. “Mom is getting even worse today and I still don’t have any answers from doctors as to how to fix this. Please pray for her. I can’t stand to see my mom this way. It makes me want to cry. knowing I can’t do anything to help her. Please don’t take the covid19 vaccine,” he wrote. The message and accompanying video has been shared nearly 160,000 times, and has racked up more than 35,000 comments. Some replies questioned the truthfulness of Griner’s story, but he told RT in an interview that there was nothing fictitious about what had happened to his mother. He stressed that she had been eager to take the vaccine because she had wanted to do everything she could to lessen the chance of spreading the virus to her own elderly parents. Griner declined to disclose at which hospital his mother received the vaccine, explaining that he didn’t want the facility to become the target of an online harassment campaign. “I’m not in any way shape or form an anti-vaxx person. My mom wasn’t – she was all for the vaccine before this happened,” he said. Griner described his mother as a “very healthy” 45-year-old who had never before suffered from any kind of serious disease or health condition. According to the Louisiana resident, she woke up with a headache a day after receiving the shot. Several days later, she began suffering from “seizure-like movements” in her left leg. By the fourth day, she had “no control” over her legs and was rushed to the emergency room. The hospital determined that she was experiencing a “neurological reaction,” he said, adding that doctors believe the medical condition was caused by “the metals in the vaccine.” Although the headaches have been a daily occurrence, the convulsions have been sporadic, Griner explained. Sunday was the first day she had not experienced a headache, and her uncontrollable leg movements also seemed to be less severe, he said. Now discharged from the hospital, Griner’s mother is undergoing tests and her doctors are hopeful that she will make a full recovery, provided there is no permanent brain damage. Although he has been smeared by some as peddling disinformation, Griner insists he initially had nothing against the jab. “I wanted it to be good. My mom wanted it to be good. That’s the reason she got it. Everybody wants their immunity. Everybody’s ready for Covid to go away,” he said. Now, however, he seems less sure about being inoculated himself. If it’s going to cause reactions like what it caused to my mom, it’s not worth it to me. Since posting the video of his mother, Griner says he has received messages from “hundreds” of people sharing their own stories about vaccines triggering serious medical episodes. One woman who contacted him said she was experiencing “continuous” health issues after receiving the Moderna Covid shot. In a follow-up video posted by Griner on Saturday, his mother explained that she opted to have the jab to “protect her parents” and that, so far, MRI scans and blood tests have not revealed any underlying condition that might have prompted the adverse reaction. “Before you take this vaccine, please think. It has definitely changed my life,” she said in the video, as she held back tears. Pfizer said in a statement to RT that it was “researching” the case, but has so far been unable to “confirm” it. “Neuromuscular disorders have not been a safety signal identified to date,” a representative of the pharmaceutical firm said. .......................................... VictorMeldrew9 No surprise there. If they indemnify the drug companies against liability then it is effectively a license for the drug companies to promote anything they choose since the governments have already signed and paid up front. DukeLeo Western vaccines were rushed into production so that Big Pharma could make a scoop on profits. At the same time negative propaganda was - intentionally - directed against the Russian Sputnik vaccine. And the result ? Western vaccines are now showing severe deficiencies and side effects, while the Russian vaccine is becoming increasingly popular. AngelGarb Many people have been propagandized into believing getting the mRNA vaccine is for the good of everyone, and will allow society to get back to normal. Please have some compassion. www.rt.com/usa/512830-griner-mother-pfizer-vaccine-video
|
|
|
Post by 3bid on Mar 11, 2021 10:25:02 GMT -5
The CDC is about to be canceled by Google and Facebook for COVID heresy March 8, 2021 On Friday afternoon, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (still called the CDC, even though they added a ‘P’) released a heretical report about mask-wearing and COVID-19. The report, authored by at least a dozen medical doctors, PhD researchers, and, bizarrely, a handful of attorneys, examined how mask mandates across the US affected COVID cases and death rates. You’d think with all of the media propaganda about mask effectiveness… and all the virtue signaling, with politicians and reporters appearing on live TV wearing masks… that the data would prove incontrovertibly and overwhelmingly that masks have saved the world. But that’s not what the report says. According to the CDC’s analysis, between March 1 and December 31 last year, statewide mask mandates were in effect in 2,313 of the 3,142 counties in the United States. And, looking at the county-by-county data, the CDC concludes that mask mandates were associated with an average 1.32% decrease in the growth rates of COVID-19 cases and deaths during the first 100 days after the mask policy was implemented. Wait, what? Only 1.32%? You read that correctly, they didn’t misplace the decimal: according to the federal government agency that is responsible for managing the COVID-1984 pandemic, the difference between mask mandates and no mask mandate is literally just a 1.32% difference. And bear in mind, it’s entirely possible that the real figure is even lower than that, given all the questionable COVID statistics. For example, the CDC reports that influenza cases in the United States have dropped to almost zero in the 2020-2021 flu season, down from 56 MILLION the previous year. It’s amazing they expect anyone to take this data seriously. Are we honestly supposed to believe that the flu has been eradicated? Or is it possible, that, maybe just maybe, at least some influenza cases have been misdiagnosed as COVID? If that’s the case, then the real impact of masks on COVID growth rates is potentially much lower than 1.32%. Even the CDC seems to understand this, because at the end of its report, they inspidly conclude by stating that mask mandates “have the potential to slow the spread of COVID-19. . .” [the bold is mine, obviously] Really? “Potential”? That’s HERESY! And an obvious contradiction to WHO guidance. It makes we wonder whether Google and Facebook are gearing up to censor this report, given they have self-appointed themselves as the Ministry of Truth. Frankly it’s pretty incredible that the data was too weak for the CDC to make a clear assertion about the benefits of mask mandates. (though I did say there were a couple of lawyers who co-authored this paper… and using non-committal language like “potential” certainly sounds like typical weasel lawyer-speak.) Now, please don’t misunderstand the point of this letter. I’m not here to bash masks or say that they don’t work, or go on some anti-mask rant. The point is that I’m pro-data. And pro-reason. Public health policies come with consequences. There are always costs, and there are (hopefully) benefits. The CDC has just published an official analysis of the benefits, quantified at precisely 1.32%. What are the costs of their decisions? Well there’s plenty of data about that too. For example, a recent study published earlier this month in the premier scientific journal Nature shows that Americans who wear masks are more likely engage in riskier activities, like, you know, leaving the house. The study conclude that mask mandates “lead to risk compensation behavior” and mask wearers “spend 11-24 fewer minutes at home on average and increase visits to some commercial locations– most notably restaurants, which are a high-risk location.” Other consequences are more grim. There have been several studies which chronicle the alarming rise in severe mental health issues, including a spike in youth suicide, as a result of various public health policies, including mask mandates and lockdowns. For example, another study published in Nature from early January reported that, in late 2020, suicide rates among children in Japan jumped 49%. And the US government’s Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service (SAMHSA) reported an incredible 890% increase in call volume to its nationwide suicide hotline last April. Then there are the economic consequences to consider: Do mask mandates boost the economy by giving people more confidence to go out and spend? Or do mask mandates compel more people to stay home to avoid the hassle, and hence reduce economic activity? There’s still no conclusive analysis on the subject. But you’d think that policymakers would want to know. You’d think that they would look at all the data, all the pro’s and con’s, economic consequences, public health consequences, etc., and make an informed, rational decision. But that doesn’t seem to happen anymore. There can be no rational discourse on the topic. You’re not allowed to ask any questions or express any intellectual dissent, otherwise you’ll be denounced as a conspiracy theorist. You have one job: obey. It’s not even about ‘trusting the science’ anymore, as we’ve been told to do over and over again during the pandemic. Because now the science tells us that mask mandates “have the potential” to reduce Covid growth rates by just 1.32%. Not that you’ll hear this in the media. There actually was a bonanza of coverage over the weekend about the CDC’s new report. The Washington Post headline read “After state lift restrictions, CDC says mask mandates can reduce deaths”. The New York Times reported that “Wearing masks, the [CDC] study reported, was linked to fewer infections with the coronavirus and Covid-19 deaths.” NBC called the report “strong evidence that mask mandates can slow the spread of the coronavirus. . .” But very little of the media coverage bothered to mention the real data, i.e. the marginal 1.32% reduction in growth rates. Just like the CDC’s influenza data, it’s incredible that the media expects to be taken seriously, or that they pass themselves off as an objective, unbiased source of information. www.sovereignman.com/trends/the-cdc-is-about-to-be-canceled-by-google-and-facebook-for-covid-heresy-31329/
|
|
|
Post by vulcanized crawler on Mar 11, 2021 10:41:49 GMT -5
in the usa covid killed a billion people, but, no longer any deaths from heart disease, tb, liver disease, kidney failure, cancer, lung disease, brain cancer, tonsilitis, common cold, seasonal flu, motorcycle accidents, so we should be very happy. covid erased all other causes of death. imagine that. and hospitals got paid for each covid death. isnt corrupt medical agencies wonderful.
|
|
|
Post by raidermike99 on Mar 12, 2021 5:25:12 GMT -5
The CDC is about to be canceled by Google and Facebook for COVID heresy March 8, 2021 On Friday afternoon, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (still called the CDC, even though they added a ‘P’) released a heretical report about mask-wearing and COVID-19. The report, authored by at least a dozen medical doctors, PhD researchers, and, bizarrely, a handful of attorneys, examined how mask mandates across the US affected COVID cases and death rates. You’d think with all of the media propaganda about mask effectiveness… and all the virtue signaling, with politicians and reporters appearing on live TV wearing masks… that the data would prove incontrovertibly and overwhelmingly that masks have saved the world. But that’s not what the report says. According to the CDC’s analysis, between March 1 and December 31 last year, statewide mask mandates were in effect in 2,313 of the 3,142 counties in the United States. And, looking at the county-by-county data, the CDC concludes that mask mandates were associated with an average 1.32% decrease in the growth rates of COVID-19 cases and deaths during the first 100 days after the mask policy was implemented. Wait, what? Only 1.32%? You read that correctly, they didn’t misplace the decimal: according to the federal government agency that is responsible for managing the COVID-1984 pandemic, the difference between mask mandates and no mask mandate is literally just a 1.32% difference. And bear in mind, it’s entirely possible that the real figure is even lower than that, given all the questionable COVID statistics. For example, the CDC reports that influenza cases in the United States have dropped to almost zero in the 2020-2021 flu season, down from 56 MILLION the previous year. It’s amazing they expect anyone to take this data seriously. Are we honestly supposed to believe that the flu has been eradicated? Or is it possible, that, maybe just maybe, at least some influenza cases have been misdiagnosed as COVID? If that’s the case, then the real impact of masks on COVID growth rates is potentially much lower than 1.32%. Even the CDC seems to understand this, because at the end of its report, they inspidly conclude by stating that mask mandates “have the potential to slow the spread of COVID-19. . .” [the bold is mine, obviously] Really? “Potential”? That’s HERESY! And an obvious contradiction to WHO guidance. It makes we wonder whether Google and Facebook are gearing up to censor this report, given they have self-appointed themselves as the Ministry of Truth. Frankly it’s pretty incredible that the data was too weak for the CDC to make a clear assertion about the benefits of mask mandates. (though I did say there were a couple of lawyers who co-authored this paper… and using non-committal language like “potential” certainly sounds like typical weasel lawyer-speak.) Now, please don’t misunderstand the point of this letter. I’m not here to bash masks or say that they don’t work, or go on some anti-mask rant. The point is that I’m pro-data. And pro-reason. Public health policies come with consequences. There are always costs, and there are (hopefully) benefits. The CDC has just published an official analysis of the benefits, quantified at precisely 1.32%. What are the costs of their decisions? Well there’s plenty of data about that too. For example, a recent study published earlier this month in the premier scientific journal Nature shows that Americans who wear masks are more likely engage in riskier activities, like, you know, leaving the house. The study conclude that mask mandates “lead to risk compensation behavior” and mask wearers “spend 11-24 fewer minutes at home on average and increase visits to some commercial locations– most notably restaurants, which are a high-risk location.” Other consequences are more grim. There have been several studies which chronicle the alarming rise in severe mental health issues, including a spike in youth suicide, as a result of various public health policies, including mask mandates and lockdowns. For example, another study published in Nature from early January reported that, in late 2020, suicide rates among children in Japan jumped 49%. And the US government’s Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service (SAMHSA) reported an incredible 890% increase in call volume to its nationwide suicide hotline last April. Then there are the economic consequences to consider: Do mask mandates boost the economy by giving people more confidence to go out and spend? Or do mask mandates compel more people to stay home to avoid the hassle, and hence reduce economic activity? There’s still no conclusive analysis on the subject. But you’d think that policymakers would want to know. You’d think that they would look at all the data, all the pro’s and con’s, economic consequences, public health consequences, etc., and make an informed, rational decision. But that doesn’t seem to happen anymore. There can be no rational discourse on the topic. You’re not allowed to ask any questions or express any intellectual dissent, otherwise you’ll be denounced as a conspiracy theorist. You have one job: obey. It’s not even about ‘trusting the science’ anymore, as we’ve been told to do over and over again during the pandemic. Because now the science tells us that mask mandates “have the potential” to reduce Covid growth rates by just 1.32%. Not that you’ll hear this in the media. There actually was a bonanza of coverage over the weekend about the CDC’s new report. The Washington Post headline read “After state lift restrictions, CDC says mask mandates can reduce deaths”. The New York Times reported that “Wearing masks, the [CDC] study reported, was linked to fewer infections with the coronavirus and Covid-19 deaths.” NBC called the report “strong evidence that mask mandates can slow the spread of the coronavirus. . .” But very little of the media coverage bothered to mention the real data, i.e. the marginal 1.32% reduction in growth rates. Just like the CDC’s influenza data, it’s incredible that the media expects to be taken seriously, or that they pass themselves off as an objective, unbiased source of information. www.sovereignman.com/trends/the-cdc-is-about-to-be-canceled-by-google-and-facebook-for-covid-heresy-31329/ People just believe the headlines and don't bother to look up the real data.
|
|
|
HOW
Mar 12, 2021 12:07:25 GMT -5
Post by vulcanized crawler on Mar 12, 2021 12:07:25 GMT -5
i read the report put together in 1919 on the spanish flu of 1918 in the usa. it stated that more died of viral pneumonia than of spanish flu. seems they had mandatory mask wearing and recycling bacteria all day long into the lungs along with co2 causes severe pneumonia and deaths from pneumonia were much more deadly than was the actual spanish flu. results of that r eport made it obvious that masks were ineffective and lethal. for the next 102 years no masks were ever worn during numerous flu epidemics, citing the govt 1919 report. seems the msm and politicians didnt read the report and the cdc nih who are just plain political lying hacks
|
|
|
HOW
Mar 12, 2021 13:53:57 GMT -5
Post by 3bid on Mar 12, 2021 13:53:57 GMT -5
Imagine a career vaccine developer coming out and speaking from the heart. Not anti-vax, but an established scientist working within the system.
Imagine a serious plead for global scientific community awareness on specific critical issues demanding immediate action, for the sake of humanity.
Imagine that it may already be too late.
**Mass Vaccination in a Pandemic - Benefits vs Risks: Interview with Geert Vanden Bossche, International Vaccine Developer**
Geert Vanden Bossche PhD, is an internationally recognised vaccine developer having worked as the head of the Vaccine Development Office at the German Centre for Infection Research. Coordinated Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation's Ebola Vaccine Program and contributed to the implementation of an integrated vaccine work plan in collaboration with Global Health Partners (WHO, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, CDC, UNICEF), regulators (FDA) and vaccine manufacturers to enable timely deployment or stockpiling of Ebola vaccine candidates. Highlighting the principle of using a prophylactic vaccine in the midst of a pandemic. Likely to create more more viral variants in the process. Sharing his perspective on mass vaccination in COVID-19.
|
|
|
HOW
Mar 12, 2021 19:54:05 GMT -5
Post by cmkxjunkie on Mar 12, 2021 19:54:05 GMT -5
read the report put together in 1919 on the spanish flu of 1918 in the usa. it stated that more died of viral pneumonia than of spanish flu. seems they had mandatory mask wearing and recycling bacteria all day long into the lungs along with co2 causes severe pneumonia and deaths from pneumonia were much more deadly than was the actual spanish flu. results of that r eport made it obvious that masks were ineffective and lethal. for the next 102 years no masks were ever worn during numerous flu epidemics, citing the govt 1919 report. seems the msm and politicians didnt read the report and the cdc nih who are just plain political lying hacks Nice try but incorrect. I'm not sure what report you read but I imagine it was from Facebook which had such a false article being circulated. The NIAID in 2008 published an article indicating that Bacterial infection was the more likely cause of death during the 1918-1920 Spanish Flu global pandemic. They qualified their findings from the analysis of tissue samples from the era. What they found is that the influenza virus so damaged the air passages in the nose, throat and lungs that they were suceptible to the bacterial infection that followed. Mask wearing was never mentioned but it was assumed in the Facebook article. So lesson of the day is: Dont read crap from unreliable sources...
|
|
|
HOW
Mar 13, 2021 7:13:58 GMT -5
urday likes this
Post by 3bid on Mar 13, 2021 7:13:58 GMT -5
First Court Case Against Mandatory Vaccination
Mar 7, 2021
In this interview, Spiro is joined by Attorney Ana Garner of New Mexico. Garner represents her client Isaac Legaretta, an officer at the Doña Ana County Detention Center and a military veteran, who is suing the county over its new policy for first responders to receive the COVID-19 vaccinations or face termination. Attorney Garner explains the significance of this case and what is at stake, as it is the first of its kind and may set a new standard for legal precedent regarding mandatory vaccination. Garner says she is prepared to take this case to the Supreme Court if necessary. Spiro and Ana Garner also discuss another case of her’s that is ongoing currently. A case that challenges not only the Governor of New Mexico, but the emergency itself. "I say, stand your ground, we have to stand our ground. And this is why it's gotten into this position, is we've had too many people capitulate to authority. This is an unbridled tyranical expression of authority that I've never seen in my lifetime. And my mother, close to ninety, has never seen it in her lifetime. It's been shocking, what's happened. If we continue to let them steamroll over us, we are going to be in an even worse position. We've got to stand our ground; we have to say this all stops when we say no, no more. Standing your ground for this particular, I think, dangerous product, is something that will preserve your health, it will preserve your family's stability because there have been so many side-effects. But it will also show them that we are not be used as human guinea pigs. We have the right to choose what goes into our bodies. And so I say to people: even the COVID disease, yes, it does kill people. But it's not as bad as what we are seeing with the reaction. And I think there are going to be far more adverse effects that show-up years later, in the form of auto immune disorders, in the form of increased inflammation types of related diseases. And I think that we are looking at some pretty serious consequences down the road." (comment) I Love the fact that from the beginning she didn’t call it a vaccine! She said “Experimental Covid-19 INJECTION”.....exactly what it is....
|
|
|
HOW
Mar 13, 2021 9:03:43 GMT -5
urday likes this
Post by vulcanized crawler on Mar 13, 2021 9:03:43 GMT -5
first...i dont do facebook. i read the 1919 after action type report by the us govt about the spanish flu in the usa during 1917/18. period. 90% of deaths were due to bacteria recycling into the lungs resulting in viral pneumonia from wearing gauze masks. your own c02 would also contribute, but, that was not mentioned. 10% died of the flu alone. 9 to 1 ratio. the conclusion was never to use masks again, as they were a bigger problem than the flu itself...and no masks were worn for another 102 yrs during flu epidemics!!! not until corrupt medical agency personnel (fauci) and msm ds promoted masks. back during spanish flu they didnt include tb, pneumonia , motorcycle accidents as flu deaths. that is a cdc nih who ds thing from 2020. dont call people liars and dont ''assume''. anything you read on facebook or msm is suspect, as anything true would have been censored. any true medical report that doesnt follow the msm line, is censored, banished or deleted. you have to do your homework. it isnt easy to do as everything is hidden or censored. i used the county library. you do not have to believe my research...i did it for me. i knew the truth, as i know science and the size of a virus particle....15-.30 microns can penetrate anything just about. what i found in the 1919 report astounded me.
|
|
|
Post by vulcanized crawler on Mar 13, 2021 9:09:33 GMT -5
first...i dont do facebook. i read the 1919 after action type report by the us govt about the spanish flu in the usa during 1917/18. period. 90% of deaths were due to bacteria recycling into the lungs resulting in viral pneumonia from wearing gauze masks. your own c02 would also contribute, but, that was not mentioned. 10% died of the flu alone. 9 to 1 ratio. the conclusion was never to use masks again, as they were a bigger problem than the flu itself...and no masks were worn for another 102 yrs during flu epidemics!!! not until corrupt medical agency personnel (fauci) and msm ds promoted masks. back during spanish flu they didnt include tb, pneumonia , motorcycle accidents as flu deaths. that is a cdc nih who ds thing from 2020. dont call people liars and dont ''assume''. anything you read on facebook or msm is suspect, as anything true would have been censored. any true medical report that doesnt follow the msm line, is censored, banished or deleted. you have to do your homework. it isnt easy to do as everything is hidden or censored. i used the county library (real old books). you do not have to believe my research...i did it for me. i share. i knew the truth, as i know science and the size of a virus particle... .15-.30 microns can penetrate anything... just about. what i found in the 1919 report astounded me. also a virus that has a recovery rate of 95-99.8% (depending upon age) does not require a vaccine. this indeed was a ds seasonal political flu and if you believe msm or facebook, you indeed are believing crap unfortunately most americans and citizens of the world did believe....at least until recently.
|
|