Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Dr. John Campbell"
channel.
-
385
-
243
-
212
-
199
-
142
-
141
-
124
-
123
-
105
-
74
-
69
-
63
-
45
-
44
-
43
-
42
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@nevillegoddard4966 So . . . The new list of Bad Foods includes . . . Red onions, fresh garlic, ginger, parsley, olive oil, avocados, black olives, capers, kimchi, goat kefir, broccoli, zucchini, red kale, spinach, tangerines, blueberries, raspberries, cherries . . . Sure, buddy. LOL
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
I did as well, because I read a description on the MIT website of how these mRNA vaccines work.
First of all, I had symptoms of COVID in March 2020, and no test was available to me because I had not been outside the country or in close contact with anyone who had been outside the country -- though I had been very close to a known hotspot, and in lots of crowds shopping for groceries in advance of the shutdowns, in one case standing close to a woman who worked in a major hospital. So, I never found out for sure whether I had COVID.
Second, after reading the MIT description, I decide to use the J & J vaccine instead. I could not find anyone who was offering it, and then it was pulled for a short time, because it had caused blood clots to the brain. That did it. I started asking questions. Those questions were met with the greatest derision and flat-out hatred that I have ever experienced, and that is saying a lot.
Thats when I knew something was very wrong with this picture.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@hazmat5118 1. "It's not about perfection" is too broad and vague: that could justify a lot of things that no one should accept. That sort of blather proves too much. 2. We were not informed about the risks and benefits, and stories of injuries were systematically suppressed; a vaccine that cannot protect others but only protects the one who takes it, and only for a matter of months, should not be mandatory. 3. I thought of that early on: if this is indeed the product of an accidental lab leak, we may need a vaccine to overcome it. It seems that recent variants are more transmissible and less lethal, which is exactly how natural viruses evolve, so that seems not to be a risk anymore, but we cannot be sure. The next variant could be much more lethal, just as we sometimes have an unusually lethal strain of flu. People have to admit they do not know what they do not know, and quit pretending they do.
Interesting that Fauci suppressed the lab leak theory while insisting that everyone be vaccinated, when the lab leak theory could have furnished another reason to be vaccinated. All I can say is that thank goodness that corona viruses are something we have all encountered, or this would have a far more lethal pandemic.
Too much of what happened over the past three years smacks too much of being a dress rehearsal for something worse.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
So sorry! For whatever it may be worth, back when we were in our teens and twenties, everyone I know who developed any serious viral disease -- mononucleosis, hepatitis A, meningitis, pneumonia -- took a full year to feel like themselves, meaning, as if they had never been sick at all. We were young people, and we weren't suffering from a novel virus. Then remember all the people who developed chronic fatigue after a viral illness? I was one, and we were in such despair -- even though it had happened to several of us at the same time. Well, it resolved, for nearly everyone, within a year. I realize we were lucky and that there is no guarantee that will be the case for everyone, but remember, we were told we'd never feel like ourselves again. Within in year, nearly everyone did; within two, everyone was clearly much better. Take good care of yourself! Walk in parks and forests.
4
-
4
-
This is an outstanding video, with complete references. We need to keep an open mind, with no holds barred whatsoever. It will not do to assume that the vaccines are to blame; it has to be examined honestly. There could be a lot of factors; my first concern after the vaccines were introduced was whether people who had had COVID needed these vaccines, or should have them. No answers.
Then, the bullying came. Well, I don't want to make assumptions in response to assumptions. I want to see real gravitas for a change, I want complete honesty. The sheer stress caused by our politicians and public health officials certainly was harmful. Staying indoors for so long was harmful. Those "mitigation" measures may have been worse than the disease for anyone under 40, and a lot of people over 40, 50, 60, . . .
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@brockreynolds870 "If you have to be persuaded, reminded pressured, lied to, incentivized, coerced, bullied, socially shamed, guilt-tripped, threatened, punished and criminalized... if all of this is considered necessary to gain your compliance, you can be absolutely certain that what is being promoted is not in your best interest." - Ian Watson
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
I had a very unusually severe cold in October 2019, followed by two weeks of extreme fatigue. I have not had fever with a cold since before puberty. Then, I had apparent COVID symptoms in March 2020, which were only mild at that time. I have not been sick since, and have not been vaccinated. I have been in very large crowds, in numerous international airports, many times since the summer of 2022. I have been exposed to COVID in other places as well.
Never have tested positive for COVID; my white blood cell count almost 4 months after the apparent COVID in 2020 was normal, but unusually high for me -- it deviated significantly from the prior ten years of white blood counts, which are all about the same.
I think I must have had COVID, and a coronavirus cold as well, before that.
That would explain why I seem to have had such good resistance since then. Too bad public health authorities had so little curiosity about this illness. At a minimum, of course. Maybe something more nefarious was going on?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Denali1600 I will look it up. My simple point is, she told you where she got her numbers. I personally always look at deaths per million, although at this point we do not really know what they include. I will explain.
It took a long time to establish that women who underwent multiple fertility hormone treatments without conceiving were at greater risk of ovarian cancer than those who did conceive. In relation to this issue, of deaths per million, I wonder whether those who had moderate to severe COVID, then were vaccinated with mRNA or other vaccines, in that order or in the reverse order for that matter, now have a higher risk of death.
Multivariate analysis, which can give us the answer, is difficult, expensive and takes a long time. You get my drift.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I remember that story. I wondered how it was that the medical staff had the right to violate patient confidentiality in that particularly brutal way. I frankly didn't believe the story. Sorry to hear it made such an outsized impression on you.
What makes you feel so sure the vaccines are both safe and effective, and suitable for everyone? The evidence is not in favor of those beliefs. As for these excess deaths, we don't know what factors are at play. Previous exposure to COVID, recovery from COVID, the many negative effects of the shutdown, which include physical and psychological harm, the vaccines by themselves, the vaccines in combination with COVID or COVID exposure -- all possibilities need to be explored, and multivariate analysis is not a simple process. We may not have answers for a long time, which means it's time to get serious and begin the hard work.
Anecdotes don't prove what is likely, but they do indicate what is possible. One relative by marriage, 80 years old with some weight issues, died of COVID. He was fully vaccinated. I know of no one else who had severe COVID.
2
-
BMJ (formerly, British Medical Journal) reported on some suggestive data that vegans, vegetarians, and modified vegetarians who eat fish may be at lower risk of severe COVID and death. DW (German) picked up the story right away. American press will not touch it. Why? This is one study, and is not definitive, and DOES NOT say vegetarianism prevents COVID, or is as effective as vaccines, or anything like that. It's simply information. I've been eating foods high in quercetin like mad (apples, sweet onions, garlic, capers, etc.). I mean come on, we can all do better.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@johneubank8543 So . . . The new list of Bad Foods includes . . . Red onions, fresh garlic, ginger, parsley, olive oil, avocados, black olives, capers, kimchi, goat kefir, arugula, broccoli, zucchini, red kale, spinach, beets, tangerines, blueberries, raspberries, cherries . . . Sure, buddy. LOL
I eat garlic raw.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Dantianblue Pub Med article from August 2023: "The pooled hazard ratio (HR) revealed no significant association of COVID-19 vaccination with all-cause mortality (HR = 0.89, 95% CI [0.71, 1.10], p = .28). Regarding cardiac-related mortality, the pooled HR suggests that COVID-19 vaccination is associated with an increased risk of cardiac-related mortality (HR = 1.06, 95% CI [1.02, 1.11], p = .007). Subgroup analysis showed that the male gender is significantly associated with an increased incidence of cardiac-related deaths (HR = 1.09, 95% CI [1.02, 1.15], p = .006). In conclusion, COVID-19 vaccination may be associated with a small increase in cardiac-related mortality, especially among males."
That's what they admit so far.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I'm reminded of the possible breast cancer cluster in the San Francisco area, which took a LONG time to analyze. It turned out that the number of cases, though higher than what may have been expected, was within the norms of the demographic affected, and the "cluster" was not statistically significant. Yet it was important to let women know to be vigilant, and do what little we could determine might lower risk (such as exercise, occasional fasting, more plant-based foods, vegan days, etc., and of course regular mammography).
Similarly, we DO have a problem with vaccine injury, and we DO need to get to the bottom of it. Screaming at the victims is vile. Multivariate analysis is not easy, and takes a long time to complete because there are unavoidable judgment calls to be made. The report from Germany that Dr. Campbell highlighted in his previous video is a basis for starting a serious inquiry, never mind all of these other studies. I don't prejudge how it will end, but there is too much signal amidst the noise. Dismissing it is bad faith, and does nothing to reassure the public concerning the integrity of the medical system.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
No one will admit that the vaccines approved in the West are a disappointment at best. We do not even know how Chinese, Russian, Cuban, etc., vaccines compare. Why isn't this simple data, such as it is, and so early after vaccine development, available? We should have all the available information.
I read some suggestive data on Sputnik V being just as reactogenic as other vaccines using adenovirus as the vector, but not causing fatal blood clots. Well? What happened? Was that true or not? It was being tested in South America, and it was available in Mexico. What have they found out, if anything?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@garthdryland First, these numbers are prelimiary -- I have read research papers with the opposite conclusion. Second, there is at least one glaring flaw in your reasoning: you are comparing known cases of COVID where young men were suspected of having myocarditis and tested for it (when we know that in young people, COVID can pass unnoticed), with reported cases following a vaccination. You know whether someone was vaccinated, and you know to watch for the side effect -- it was first reported two years ago. You may not know if a young person had COVID, because it is so often very mild. So that denominator in the COVID group could be much larger, and the myocarditis rate smaller, than you think it is. Then there is the problem that we don't always know who had COVID before being vaccinated. Vaccinating those people could turn out to have been unwise, especially if they are young and have robust immune responses.
But just parrot one study. Whenever I finish a post like this, I pause to wonder why I care.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@hazmat5118 Well, I agree that early variants, including the original virus, were clearly more dangerous to older people than current variants are. It now appears that even early on, young people were often asymptomatic, so the vaccines were probably not as helpful to them as to those over 40, and especially over 70.
I think at this point we know a lot of people were injured by the vaccines, but now the discourse is shifting, so that those people are being scared they they will never get better. This is unbelievably cruel, and appears not to be the case. Jennifer Sharp, who just wrote, directed, and appeared in the documentary Anecdotals, said that she herself is almost back to normal, and most of her side effects ended within several months of taking the vaccine. They were not trivial, but her life was not at risk and she is much better. For her, the real story was the silencing and shunning she was subjected to after she had a reaction -- which may have made her symptoms worse. That ticks me off hugely.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Natalie-earth Literally no other country I've heard of recommends vaccinating infants. I'm, like, if Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, etc., don't do this, it is automatically off the table. If they do, I may consider it. But if they don't, I won't. That's where I'm at now. ;/
Different countries' ministries of health have English-language websites now, and I check. Someone actually told me I was lying, and that that is not possible (!!)
Er, yes. Yes it is.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Stormer13 It has been shocking to me how much is known and not shared -- and how much is censored as well. Dr. Campbell has spread the word on Vitamin D in particular, and zinc is of some help as well -- plus, there is evidence that these vaccines may work better in those with ample vitamin D levels. (Or maybe it's just the D!)
When I write about something I've read in a peer-reviewed journal, in a measured way and with references, it is almost always taken down. Look up lysine-arginine ratios, for example, and what the good ones do for viral illnesses, including this one. The least expensive foods have excellent ratios. Look at which foods are high in vitamin K and quercetin. Similar result. When it dawned on me, I felt so dispirited. Of course these are not "cures," or sure-fire prevention. No one said they were. But failing to tell us what we could DO is unconscionable. I'm being careful here in what I say, not to attract censorship. :/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MsGarnet77 I read it, and I wasn't impressed that it was solid. To his credit, he gave a summary of all the reasons his numbers could not be compared to a carefully controlled study, a true audit of VAERS, and so forth. Saying that, I don't want to suggest that deaths due wholly or in part to the vaccine aren't happening, or that he didn't detect a signal that necessitates immediate attention. The people who should be racing to study this are failing us.
At this point, they will need to do a multivariate analysis, because so many things have changed, or been imposed on us, all at once. This is not going to be easy, and the fact that they are not urgently looking into the question of vaccine safety is one of the most shocking and disillusioning things I have ever experienced.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@allangibson2408 Explain why Pfizer has joined the FDA in keeping the original test data secret. Explain why the head of the CDC admitted under oath, in cordial, not adversarial questioning by a very polite Senator (and properly so, for a change), that she does not know the number or rate of severe adverse events.
There is no question that for anyone over 30 and healthy, not getting vaccinated is a crap shoot. They are taking a risk. COVID is rarely serious under 30, but by 50 it is a big deal. What they don't know is the risk on the other side, because Pfizer, the FDA, and the CDC refuse to tell. It is also obvious that COVID is generally curable, and the very wealthy have no problem getting treated. Open your eyes. Trump, Chris Christie, Nancy P maskless getting her roots done, Gavin at the French restaurant, AOC at the Met. They are furious with Joe Rogan for letting the cat out of the bag.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@richvid9814 Okay, honey. I studied philosophy of science at the Paris IV, among other things, and I really don't have time for this unserious video. What does one case prove? One case, accurately reported, tells us what is POSSIBLE. It does not tell us what is usual. In biology, one single case is very unlikely to be limited to that one single person and true of no one else, but that, too, may be turn out to be true. That, too, is not impossible.
The clinical studies for these vaccines were inadequate. THIS is why, or at least one major reason why, there are so many questions remaining, and there are so many confounding variables present at this point that it becomes very hard to figure out what is going on, what the real risks are, what the risk/benefit calculus should be, by demographic, etc., and various forms of multivariate analysis will have to be done. This will take time and money. We won't have anything very solid to rely on for a while.
What I think people should do is consult the ministries of health of more civilized countries and see what they are recommending. It's all online.
What was the point of your post, other than to flaunt your assumption that everyone besides you is stupid? Looks like you provided evidence for the opposite.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@@TOM-TOM-TOM " If you disagree with the study author's conclusions, you can't really use the info from the study, if their conclusion is wrong, then everything about their study is most likely to be wrong."
This is not the case at all. This is the very reason for peer review, and generally represents the scope of peer review. Barring evidence to the contrary, reviewers will generally assume the integrity of the data presented, and then see whether the conclusions follow rigorously from that data. That's all that peer review generally is.
If someone presents the study data without stating that its conclusion differs from their own and why, that may be misleading. Or it may be advocacy. If they elect to present the study, what matters is to be meticulous about reviewing the data and taking care to draw sound conclusions from it.
I just saw a study the other day concerning magnesium that looked to me to be too sanguine about the risks of having too much magnesium in the bloodstream, and advocating too strongly for increasing magnesium intake, especially among those who are suffering from COVID. True, the data indicated that low levels of magnesium were a much more common problem -- widespread, in fact -- and that having too much magnesium is really unusual. Still, I didn't think the conclusions were solid. I believed the data -- I had to, to come to this view. You do see that, right?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ryanthomas4069 False. You don't understand Bayesian probability. If your risk of X is very, very tiny, then clinical outcome is less important in making a cost-benefit analysis regarding preventative strategies and their risks than when the risk of X is higher.
Do young people contract severe COVID with myocarditis at all? If they don't, or very, very rarely, then the fact that it presents a danger to them is not a reason to take a vaccine known to cause an apparently milder case of myocarditis more often than COVID itself does, especially where, as this study acknowledges, there were a handful of myocarditis deaths associated with vaccination. The study also listed the 90-day time frame as a possible limitation on the value of the data. This simply acknowledges the fact that we don't know long-term outcomes for either COVID or the vaccines.
I'm an attorney who specialized in the federal rules of expert witness testimony under Daubert. This is the common sense interpretation of risk analysis, and it is also the law. You're the one who has projected feelings (and dumb slogans) into the discussion, for some reason. Some obscure reason.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Actually, we do not know what is behind this wave of non-COVID excess deaths. (If you go to the anti-Campbell websites -- don't; I did it for you -- you will find them insisting that not getting vaccination is causing excess deaths. Of COURSE they have no idea.) The point, however, is that we need a dispassionate assessment, that a multivariate analysis must be done, that it is complex, not easy to do (you can't leave it to an "algorithm"), and takes time and prudent judgment --- all the essential things we lack, thanks to the mass hysteria that has been directly imposed on us by our governments, MSM, and the elites who direct them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
In most of the English-speaking world, the people who made serious money in their prime will have outstanding medical advice and care for the rest of their lives. As far as they are concerned, the rest of us should hurry up and kick that bucket.
In my city, before the pandemic, the very richest neighborhood had a mean life expectancy very close to 90. The very poorest, about 60. Yes, the richest live almost 50% longer on average than the poorest, though of course the concentrations of excess deaths among the poor are in infancy, and then again after 65 or so (no point in having them collect a SSA, i.e., government, pension).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dez083 The fact is that polio vaccines BMGF promoted throughout Africa and India -- oral live attenuated vaccines to be precise, which are no longer used in any developed country and haven't been for years -- carry the risk of seeding vaccine-derived polio outbreaks, because they can and do replicate and mutate. This is amply documented and has been known for years. (If you're not much of a reader, that's not our problem.) And Gates' claim that safe, modern polio vaccines are logistically harder to deliver to the global south is a LAUGH. He can't afford it? Oh, that's right. Jeff Epstein promised him money, at those dinners. But he failed to deliver.
Notice I haven't even touched on the shambles he has made of education in many communities with his experiments, or his dubious promotion of GMOs in food, or the self-dealing characteristic of his foundation that has been described at length. But more to the point is his quite obvious inability to connect with other people in any normal manner. Compassion is missing. It's evident that it is, and it does matter. No one is required to trust someone like that. Get him off the world stage. If he wants to direct how global health is handled, when he has zero qualifications, then that is not generosity. That is buying power over others' lives. That is all he's been good at doing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@pmm8621 I'm reminded of the possible breast cancer cluster in the San Francisco area, which took a LONG time to analyze. It turned out that the number of cases, though higher than what may have been expected, was within the norms of the demographic affected, and the "cluster" was not statistically significant. Yet it was important to let women know to be vigilant, and do what little we could determine might lower risk (such as exercise, occasional fasting, more plant-based foods, vegan days, etc., and of course regular mammography). Similarly, we DO have a problem with vaccine injury, and we DO need to get to the bottom of it. Screaming at the victims is vile. Multivariate analysis is not easy, and takes a long time to complete because there are unavoidable judgment calls to be made. The report from Germany is a basis for starting a serious inquiry. I don't prejudge how it will end. There is too much signal amidst the noise. Dismissing it is bad faith, and does nothing to reassure the public concerning the integrity of the medical system.
1
-
@pmm8621 Did you know, for example, that last year the Swiss Ministry of Health recommended only one dose of an mRNA vaccine to all those who had recovered from a proven case of COVID? My closest friend received her first dose, not knowing she had already been exposed to COVID, then was sick from COVID, then was rushed into her second dose as if she had never had COVID by her doctor and the state health department. Her side effects were massive, and included a serious bout of memory issues. She should have waited three months for the second dose. She now refuses boosters. Do you grasp why? Please think it through. No one would admit to her that they did not know what was best, and no one would apply the usual principles, such as the Precautionary Principle and the Hippocratic Oath, to her case. No one treated her as an individual, and now she has lost faith. NOT GOOD.
Don't try to lay this at the doorstep of the John Campbells of the world.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chrism7969 I think that there may be a way to censor the actual giving of medical advice directly to particular individuals, whether that advice be sound or not. It may be excellent advice, but it shouldn't be given, just like a doctor cannot diagnose someone they never met. As for conspiracy theories that do actual harm and defame particular people, the leading purveyors are being sued, and the plaintiffs are winning. Just showing people how that happens should be enough.
Another interesting fact is that such theories have at times been planted by various governments, for the purpose of discrediting all critics and making them all appear to be in league with the wackos. Adam Curtis, also UK, has documented this. Some of it is funny. US and USSR/RF have both done it. These days, a Russian troll farm will float a story as an experiment, to collect data on the reaction. They don't care whether they persuade, they want to study what happens. Seems more sinister? Hard to say.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stephenwilliams3213 I agree that that is the correct question. The problem is, to answer it, we would have to go back in history to find out the projected harm of swine flu at that time, versus its known harm, and we would also need to figure out the projected harm of COVID compared with its known harm. I hope you realize that currently, we do not have clean numbers on that. Second, there are lots of ways to deal with a novel drug that has serious, unexpected side effects. You put a black box warning on it, you limit use in those under 50, you stop requiring it for anyone. European countries have done all of those types of things, after being hysterical for a while as well. In France, it is illegal to ask a minor about their vaccination status. It's a misdemeanor. (As a practical result, no one is asking anyone.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mb-3faze You really believe this rot? I am for targeted vaccination based on INDIVIDUALIZED health care, always mindful of the three pillars of human health and ethical treatment: the Precautionary Principle, informed consent, and the Hippocratic Oath --- is that what you call "anti-vax?" "Muzzle the loudmouths for the good of the nation" is a totalitarian proposal. What's the point of saving lives, even assuming you will save them and not ruin them, if it is to live without basic human dignity and civil rights?
I don't know what our government wants, or what the UK or any of the Five Eyes want; their record is poor and their willingness to jeopardize human health with risky experiments is legend. They serve the major corporations first, and the rest of us as an afterthought, if at all. I have every reason to suspect that reducing the average lifespan is not something they are averse to doing, and I know the US has no plan whatsoever to stem gun violence or youth suicide. I look to the ministries of health in the Scandinavian countries, Switzerland, and even France to see what I should consider doing, not the FDA or the CDC.
The Precautionary Principle places the burden of proof of every new drug or other intervention on the proponent, to show that it is safe, effective, and suitable for the individual patient for whom it is being prescribed. We don't have to justify saying no. The burden of proof is not on us. BTW, you heard about the New York case, I hope? Fired workers reinstated with back pay. Is that why you are out of sorts today?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Most people will be all right. Don't listen to anyone who claims your life will be shortened; that is nonsense. The problem is that, from everything we are able to glean, the risk-to-benefit ratio for these vaccines was far outside of anything that was considered acceptable for any other vaccine, or any other drug for that matter, since we started keeping records. This is unprecedented.
Live super clean. It's not easy, and it's expensive. An anti-inflammatory diet, organic and non-GMO foods, etc., as well as health clubs, yoga, massage, etc., are very expensive. But accept that you very likely need this now. Don't cut corners any more. ;/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jaymevogl4338 None of this comes as a surprise to me. I support vaccines that have been carefully tested, and are given with the appropriate spacing. "Vaccinated" versus "unvaccinated" children isn't the correct comparison; it depends on which vaccines, when. That none may be better than lots and lots, into tiny bodies during their first months of life, should surprise no one. Thanks for your post.
BTW, have you seen the Yale News article about vaccines from February 2017, I believe? Dr. John Rose, who has worked on the Ebola vaccine, stated that it takes 15 to 20 years to develop a vaccine -- nearly a generation sounds about right to me. These days, you must read things that were published before 2020, and preferably before 2019, to get any idea of what real standards are. :/
1
-
@jaymevogl4338 At this point, I would only look to what the ministries of health of Scandinavian countries, Switzerland, and a few others, are recommending to make any decision about vaccines for my child. One pediatric vaccine researcher from Denmark, I believe, demonstrated a long time ago that a measles vaccine, administered properly (not too early or late, correct form and dose), lowers the overall childhood mortality rate from many infectious diseases, and that there are certain other vaccines that don't do that. (Hint hint) :/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jessd4048 How many times a year do we take polio vaccines? How common are breakthrough infections? I didn't know those vaccines could cause myocarditis, menstral issues, alopecia, and false positive mammograms. Never heard about it. Hm.
Of course, there were some contaminated polio vaccines, with a potentially dangerous simian virus, and a whole generation was closely watched for years, for signs of excess cancer. It appears nearly everyone's body simply cleared the simian virus. This hasn't been an issue in a very long time. There have been recent issues with the vaccines used in Africa causing injuries, but I don't see why that should matter, to us. /s
Anyway, as we all know, medicine is one size fits all. Your body, my choice. Or maybe Biden's choice.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If that were true, it greatly exceeds the previous vaccine safety signal threshold of 1 significant, serious event per 100,000 inoculations. Vaccines exceeding that threshold are closely scrutinized and often withdrawn. This comes to 200 events per 100,000 doses, according to you. I've never heard such a high rate acknowledged before. Something on the order of 80 per 100,000 is the number I've seen for Pfizer, from reliable sources. (I think something on the order of 70 to 120 per 100,000 is more likely generally, depending on which vaccine.)
Say, have you heard? Paxlovid is pretty near worthless.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
When I was in high-school and college, with people in their late teens and twenties, a serious viral illness -- mononucleosis, food-borne hepatitis, pneumonia, meningitis -- took from 6 months to a full year for the patient to be back to 100% normal, as though they had never been sick. These were people in their prime, not middle-aged people with chronic conditions. Why would COVID be any different?
This is all very common, and very well-known. When I was a kid, my father called it "post-influenza weakness" and told me to exercise or walk a little bit more each day. He was right.
Obviously, in this case, we have the jabs as well. That's a confounding variable!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1