Even after using Substack for many months I'm still trying to figure out a few things. Anyways, here's part 2 of the Introduction to Vaccinology post which focuses on vaccine failures:
Bravo! Three thumbs up!👍👍👍 Excellent post that I'll be sharing.
I remember putting this information to friends early on, who I thought were intelligent, and being shut down about it, due to their assumption that if they caught Covid, they were likely to die, so Any benefit was good, they thought.
So the narrative took control, and it became invasion of the body snatchers.
Trying to pass off relative risk reduction as absolute risk reduction was one of the big early red flags for me. Pharma, the cdc, and corporate media were all involved in this deception.
I explained it to a friend like this. I have a metal suit for you to wear every time you go outside, and 95% of the time it will protect you from hospitalization and death in case space junk falls on you. Oh you don't have a high risk of space junk falling on you? It doesn't matter, this metal suit is 95% protective against hospitalization and death.
Probably one of the most important things ever written for public consumption...yet, the truth remains that the percentage of people who will read this, will probably never be enough to change "how things just are". That is a tragedy, a true tragedy. What are we, as a society, doing to ourselves ? ? And why ? ?
However - and I know this was outside the scope of this piece so it's not means as criticsim - having been party to substantial crunching of data contained within the "Pfizer docs" released under court order I can safely say that even the results which you quote from (162 vs 8) are highly suspect. They look like they are created with the aid of an unblinded "statistical sieve" (the trial is in essence open label) to preferentially direct symptomatic cases in the placebo group and not the active group for PCR testing.
Even after using Substack for many months I'm still trying to figure out a few things. Anyways, here's part 2 of the Introduction to Vaccinology post which focuses on vaccine failures:
https://moderndiscontent.substack.com/p/introduction-to-vaccinology-part-2d8?s=w
Bravo! Three thumbs up!👍👍👍 Excellent post that I'll be sharing.
I remember putting this information to friends early on, who I thought were intelligent, and being shut down about it, due to their assumption that if they caught Covid, they were likely to die, so Any benefit was good, they thought.
So the narrative took control, and it became invasion of the body snatchers.
Trying to pass off relative risk reduction as absolute risk reduction was one of the big early red flags for me. Pharma, the cdc, and corporate media were all involved in this deception.
I explained it to a friend like this. I have a metal suit for you to wear every time you go outside, and 95% of the time it will protect you from hospitalization and death in case space junk falls on you. Oh you don't have a high risk of space junk falling on you? It doesn't matter, this metal suit is 95% protective against hospitalization and death.
Wear the fucking suit.
"These vaccines needed to have been stress-tested during clinical trials."
What a "PERFECT" statement!
"Ya Think?"
I don't remember the movie, but this guy and gal saw their friend go over a cliff in some big Caddy or something.
While they were sitting in a club remembering their dear departed friend, HE WALKS IN!
What did he say?
"Fucking Airbag!"
Probably one of the most important things ever written for public consumption...yet, the truth remains that the percentage of people who will read this, will probably never be enough to change "how things just are". That is a tragedy, a true tragedy. What are we, as a society, doing to ourselves ? ? And why ? ?
Thanks for an excellent description, something I have been trying to drum into people for a year and a half now (see my pinned tweet: https://twitter.com/jengleruk/status/1348610177805799425?s=20&t=fBi5dqk9CwQFNw8KrZJG7Q)
However - and I know this was outside the scope of this piece so it's not means as criticsim - having been party to substantial crunching of data contained within the "Pfizer docs" released under court order I can safely say that even the results which you quote from (162 vs 8) are highly suspect. They look like they are created with the aid of an unblinded "statistical sieve" (the trial is in essence open label) to preferentially direct symptomatic cases in the placebo group and not the active group for PCR testing.
Sign our petition calling for an investigation into Pfizer clinical trial fraud allegations
Most Americans think the fraud allegations against Pfizer (as well as their own admission of fraud in court) should be investigated.
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/should-the-fda-investigate-pfizer