Safe And Effective - A Second Opinion
A good documentary about the struggles of some of the vaccine injured in the UK.
Surprisingly also still available on YouTube
uncertainH
Member
- Member since Jun 7th 2017
- Last Activity:
Posts by uncertainH
LENR Partners
-
-
We need a third party that is above petty human corruption to guide us. When it comes to responses to pandemics, climate issues, and a range of other topics we need someone to tell us what must be done.
Sadly, I doubt any human is above petty human corruption and greed. History seems to tell us so. Perhaps we need to dispel the notion that we need anyone to lead us, the answer may lie within individual empowerment rather that ceding power to some authority and hoping that they will be benevolent.
-
GSK - Only 3 billion in fines shouldn't interfere with the profits too much
"Some pharmaceutical companies have received criticism for engaging in illegal activities, such as providing kickbacks and bribes, knowingly shipping adulterated or contaminated drugs to pharmacies, and marketing drugs for unapproved uses. This study examined financial penalties for illegal activities among large pharmaceutical firms in relation to annual revenues."
-
There is absolutely no evidence of corruption or cronyism in public health
That statement is so absurd I can't resist:
Only 10 billion dollars in fines and penalties and criminal charges too. You can drill down into the different categories and see the actual proceedings and rulings. The category titled "kickbacks and bribery" is especially fun but you can get lost in the "safety related offenses"
-
I was surprised to find that Megyn Kelly was brave enough to interview Robert F Kennedy Jr. It's 4 hours long but well worth it, part 2 focuses more on his personal life and the erosion of democracy and is very fascinating.
Part 1 - Fauci, Vaccines and Big Pharma
-
Also from that article:
"More than 1,000 children - many under the age of five - in 35 countries are thought to have been affected."
So one has to wonder if, according to the WHO, 1902 children under the age of 5 have died due to Covid worldwide (likely most with severe co-morbidities) and if about 1,000 kids have come down with hepatitis (and that is just one of many other harms) that have been caused by lockdowns, was it worth it?
Also, from the WHO article:
"In 2020 an estimated 5 million children under the age of 5 years died, mostly from preventable and treatable causes. Approximately half of those deaths, 2.4 million, occurred among newborns (in the first 28 days of life)."
"The leading causes of death in children under 5 years are preterm birth complications, birth asphyxia/trauma, pneumonia, diarrhoea and malaria, all of which can be prevented or treated with access to affordable interventions in health and sanitation."
I would suggest that all the actions of the past couple of years from vaccines to lockdowns, to masks have in some ways harmed the small children the most. Of the billions that have been handed over to Big Pharma, a fraction of that amount could have been used to actually save childrens' lives in a big way. I wonder how far a billion dollars would go to provide clean water and malaria pills to children and how any many lives that would have saved!
-
Child hepatitus mystery mostly solved...
(Nope - it aint vaccines what done it).From the article:
"The two teams of researchers, from London and Glasgow, say infants exposed later than normal - because of Covid restrictions - missed out on some early immunity to:
- adenovirus, which normally causes colds and stomach upsets
- adeno-associated virus two, which normally causes no illness and requires a coinfecting "helper" virus - such as adenovirus - to replicate
That could explain why some developed the unusual and worrying liver complications."
TH - are you anti-lockdown??!!!
Excellent point made - it's not just the vaccines it's the lockdowns and other NPIs that have cause so much damage as well.
-
What should worry people here more is how Mark U, and uncertainH did not realise this? uncertainH in particular is not living up to hir
I'll just be totally honest here, as I always try to be. I didn't read that paper that I linked in any great detail. I was so offended by Zues' meme of the crying antivaxxer baby having a midlife crisis that for the first time ever I reported a post on this forum. In keeping with my moniker it took about 2 seconds to find an alternative view point (that's what being uncertain is all about). What struck a nerve? other than obvious perverse use of dying babies to reinforce a stereotype of so called anti-vaxxers? It is that what should be robust scientific discussions have been reduced to silly memes and sound bites that mean nothing. Any paper should be read without judgement apriori and considered with uncertainty and discussed openly.
And by the way I'm male there's no need to address me as hir. I'm not uncertain about that.
-
oh, almost forgot…
There is nothing humorous about the death of children
Vaccines and sudden infant death
"While the findings in this paper are not proof of an association between infant vaccines and infant deaths, they are highly suggestive of a causal relationship."
-
I was looking up a recipe today and it called for a 1/2 teaspoon of asafoetida . Having never heard of this I looked it up and found this:
Culinary spice bioactives as potential therapeutics against SARS-CoV-2
"incorporation of asafoetida and sesame in the diet might intervene in the COVID-19 infection as a preventive and prophylactic approach"
Just thought it was interesting
(disclaimer: I am not offering medical advice here )
-
True - but the only people with brains simple enough for it to work on would be the antivaxxers.
perhaps a sophisticated technique such as MOANA would be required for the so-called anti-vaxxers.
For the vaxxers a few minutes of "news" on the main stream media is all that is required for complete mind control
-
How to call you then as the "opposing party" pro-vaxxer?
I believe the term is vaxhole.
-
Robert Kennedy is an anti Vaxer
Small correction - I just finished reading the book "The Real Anthony Fauci". I can assure you that RFK is not an anti-vaxxer. He simply digs deep into regulatory capture, poor quality clinical trials and safety issue cover ups, MSM takeover, Pharma's lack of accountability and the entire Pharma-Military Industrial Complex. Given the amount that he travels I would assume that he is vaccinated. In one of his recent speeches he explicitly states he is not an anti-vaxxer and at the the end of the book he states that he is against "some vaccines". Overall the book is not filled with his opinions but with very detailed references to real information from reputable sources. I highly recommend this book
-
I would agree with half of what you say there.
The black part or the white part?
-
I don't understand why anyone on this thread would find the word antivaxxer offensive - unless they were one.
Calling someone anti-anything is a way of perpetuating polarization, stifling constructive dialogue, shutting down honest investigation, promoting discrimination, boosting one's own ego, reinforcing divisive rhetoric, and reducing a complex and nuanced issue to a simple black and white dumbed down version of some truth or opinion.
It is important to listen and investigate all sides of any issue and not reduce complexity down to sound bites.
Simple things in life are things like light switches - they are either on or off. But when people say "the vaccines are safe and effective and to say otherwise makes you an anti-vaxxer". Hopefully everyone here would agree that safety is not an on or off thing like a switch - it is extremely complex. Effectiveness is not an on or off thing like a switch - There are ranges of effectiveness.
It is amazing how arrogant many people have become armed only with their sound bite truths.
-
That is not possible. If that had happened, similar dramatic results would have shown up in double-blind tests. No such results were seen.
I count 14 double blind RCTs with positive results:
But perhaps you could count them just to double check my math
-
One of the authors (Robert Kaplan) from Stanford Univ is one of the most respected in the field.
I also notice Peter Doshi who I believe is still a senior editor at the BMJ and has quite a few articles published in that well respected peer reviewed journal:
There this one: In which he rightfully demands to see the raw data from the clinical trials
and this one: In which he points out the shortcomings of the trials
this one: In which he warns about discourse being stifled under the guise of 'misinformation'
Questioning the 95% effectiveness: Pfizer and Moderna’s “95% effective” vaccines
gosh, i keeping finding more. Even back in 2013: Influenza: marketing vaccine by marketing disease
and as a graduate student in 2006: Influenza vaccination: policy versus evidence
My respect for that man keeps growing. And the BMJ who appear to be brave enough to occasionally publish differing points of view...
-
As of June 10, Ontario Canada is now following the UK example and is no longer reporting case rates, hospitalizations, icu and death by vaccination status perhaps now that the data clearly doesn't support the narrative.
Last time I checked it showed no difference in hospitalizations by vax status. A slight positive for vaxed people in ICU, a much higher case rate in triple jabbed folks and, at times, a much higher death rate in tripled jabbed folks.
to quote Monthy Python: "Run away, run away, run away"
-
+ The CDC is in a secret league with the big pharmacy companies around the world.
+ This secret league includes an iron grip on the main sources of medical publishing such as The Lancet etc. none of these can be trusted.It's no secret or theory:
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: protecting the private good?
Medical journals are corrupted by dependence on drug companies
-
Since this is the playground let's play a guessing game of where this quote came from:
"DTP was associated with 5-fold higher mortality than being unvaccinated. No prospective study has shown beneficial survival effects of DTP. Unfortunately, DTP is the most widely used vaccine, and the proportion who receives DTP3 is used globally as an indicator of the performance of national vaccination programs. It should be of concern that the effect of routine vaccinations on all-cause mortality was not tested in randomized trials. All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis. Though a vaccine protects children against the target disease it may simultaneously increase susceptibility to unrelated infections.
The recently published SAGE review called for randomized trials of DTP (Higgins et al., 2014). However, at the same time the IVIR-AC committee to which SAGE delegated the follow-up studies of the NSEs of vaccines has indicated that it will not be possible to examine the effect of DTP in an unbiased way. If that decision by IVIR-AC remains unchallenged, the present study may remain the closest we will ever come to a RCT of the NSEs of DTP."
DTP = Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis vaccination
