|
Post by JohnV on Dec 26, 2021 23:08:17 GMT
the number of cardiac problems relating to Pfizer is still very small. However there is considerable evidence that the risk is magnified greatly by the method used for the vsccination' (Ican't be arsed to go and hunt for the reference at the moment) The report used a comparison between the percentages of side effects in two simillar countries that use different techniques. In Norway they do not aspirate before injecting whereas in Denmark they do. The number of side effects in Norway were found to be in the order of ten times that of Denmark More data is needed but it would indicate that the (small) risk of side effects is more due to methodology than the vaccine
Incidentally the Same research institute in Denmark also released their figures on side effects with Astra Zenica based on the figures of 250,000 vaccinations.
Yes there is a risk of bloodclots with Astra Zenica of about 1 in 40,000 vaccinations
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2021 23:08:27 GMT
I buy into the fact that Pfizer are attempting to hide data of their vaccine behind a 75 year fire wall. I also buy into the fact that many experts with far more knowledge are beginning to speak out and give their honest opinions. Meanwhile, the Thunderboat vexperts are, what, entertaining? Just about…. (vExpert can be a honorary title granted to outstanding advocates of a company's products). But did you look at the general tone of other articles on that website? It is all barking mad conspiracy theory shit. There may or may not be an issue with Pfizer vaccines but if there is, that website is not an authoritative source on the matter. In fact I think it’s true that these vaccines do carry a slight health risk, but the point is that that risk is minuscule compared to the risk of the infection. For young people the differentiation is less but it’s still there. In simple terms, the website mentions increased risk of heart attack, but present no evidence of actual children who have died. It is therefore a vessel for scaremongering and conspiracy based entirely on air. Pfizer are sticking data behind a 75 year firewall. I note you are ignoring that, or at least refuse to answer. (Something to do with heart and clotting issues). Thunderboat vexperts are probably using this platform for scaremongering and conspiracy, based entirely on air. Works both ways I suppose. Personaly, I’ll follow the viewpoint of those working within the industry.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2021 23:12:28 GMT
the number of cardiac problems relating to Pfizer is still very small. Really? Very rash statement that. I’ll quote you in a few weeks time 😉
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Dec 26, 2021 23:18:21 GMT
the number of cardiac problems relating to Pfizer is still very small. Really? Very rash statement that. I’ll quote you in a few weeks time 😉 From memory the Danish figure was in the order of 350 total number of side effects at all levels per 100.000 vaccinations for Pfizer
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2021 23:27:56 GMT
Really? Very rash statement that. I’ll quote you in a few weeks time 😉 From memory the Danish figure was in the order of 350 total number of side effects at all levels per 100.000 vaccinations for Pfizer You’ve not been keeping up then. Perhaps this will update things for you. Documents released by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reveal that drugmaker Pfizer recorded nearly 160,000 adverse reactions to its COVID-19 vaccine in the initial months of its rollout. The documents were obtained from a group of doctors, professors and journalists who call themselves public health professionals and doctors for Transparency, who presented a freedom of Information Act Request (FOIA) with the FDA for their release, AsumeTech reported. The first tranche of papers reveal that how of February 2021, when Pfizer’s shooting was launched out All over the world on an emergency base, the drug manufacturer had filled out more of 42,000 case reports describing in detailing nearly 160,000 adverse reactions to jab. These reactions ranged from mild to severe and were 1,223 fatal. The majority of these case reports involved people aged between 31 and 50 in the United States. More than 25,000 nervous system disturbances have been reported, together with 17,000 musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders and 14,000 gastrointestinal disorders. A range of Several autoimmune conditions have been reported together with some peculiar diseases, including 270 “Spontaneous abortions”, and accidents of herpes, epilepsy, heart failure and blows, among thousands of others. These side effects were previously known, and have all been logged on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database, which as of Sunday has tracked 3,300 deaths following vaccination with Pfizer’s vaccine, a figure broadly in keeping with the company’s own data. Critics say that some of these deaths cannot be conclusively linked to vaccination, while others argue that the true number of deaths and adverse effects is underreported. Critically, Pfizer’s documents were used by the FDA to declare the company’s jab safe, which it did for Americans aged 16 and older in August. It has since been approved for children as young as five, and booster doses for people aged 16 and up were approved last week. The FDA says it may take until 2096 to release all 451,000 pages it used to approve Pfizer’s vaccine.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Dec 26, 2021 23:38:42 GMT
first off you are confusing reports like this with reported to proven effects. You will find similar initial reports from the US FDA on virtually everything that has ever been produced.
by the way the Danish report only came out this month ..... I would suggest that is keeping pretty much up to date.
This you might find interesting (it's on aspiration, also from earlier this month)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2021 23:49:31 GMT
first off you are confusing reports like this with reported to proven effects. You will find similar initial reports from the US FDA on virtually everything that has ever been produced. I'm not confused. Unlike yourself and others on here, I'm not promoting anything either. I'm just looking for answers. I don't particularly care about who has the jab or not, but without going into detail, I really regret getting mine. Big mistake.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Dec 27, 2021 8:47:53 GMT
first off you are confusing reports like this with reported to proven effects. You will find similar initial reports from the US FDA on virtually everything that has ever been produced. I'm not confused. Unlike yourself and others on here, I'm not promoting anything either. I'm just looking for answers. I don't particularly care about who has the jab or not, but without going into detail, I really regret getting mine. Big mistake. Getting information from an 11 month old provisional report from the FDA on side effects is not a good source of information on what are or are not the side effects and their likelihood on any medical product.
You first need to understand what such a report is .... it's a giant sized arse covering maneuver.
The FDA has been (rightly) castigated many times for a cavalier attitude to passing products as safe.
As a result it is now so shackled by the politicians as to be about as quick responding as a constipated giant sloth and as cautious as ....... a liberal in Northern Idaho ?
On reported side effects, everything goes down on the list, however stupid, farfetched or even downright crazy from "my granny turned into a zombie" to "it made me see Jesus" (and boy, Americans have a whole new encyclopedia of crazy)
As a result, any initial report from them is pretty useless
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2021 9:26:38 GMT
I'm not confused. Unlike yourself and others on here, I'm not promoting anything either. I'm just looking for answers. I don't particularly care about who has the jab or not, but without going into detail, I really regret getting mine. Big mistake. Getting information from an 11 month old provisional report from the FDA on side effects is not a good source of information on what are or are not the side effects and their likelihood on any medical product.
You first need to understand what such a report is .... it's a giant sized arse covering maneuver.
The FDA has been (rightly) castigated many times for a cavalier attitude to passing products as safe.
As a result it is now so shackled by the politicians as to be about as quick responding as a constipated giant sloth and as cautious as ....... a liberal in Northern Idaho ?
On reported side effects, everything goes down on the list, however stupid, farfetched or even downright crazy from "my granny turned into a zombie" to "it made me see Jesus" (and boy, Americans have a whole new encyclopedia of crazy)
As a result, any initial report from them is pretty useless
In 6 months time, vaccine information will start leaking out of the sieve. In 12 months time, the nhs will be reporting a sudden rise in heart and blood conditions. In 2 years time, msm will be demonising the vaccines, and all those that became social media experts and influencers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2021 9:36:01 GMT
Some said good to see you back foxy, not me, you are still a prick.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Dec 27, 2021 11:54:14 GMT
pays to research your researchers.
this is based on an excerpt from an unpublished paper ..... there is only one name on the excerpt (the above renowned cardiologist) as oposed to the normal list of associates of the team.
the excerpt was published over a month ago and we are still waiting for a sight of the paper
incidentally this is the signiture on the publication gundrymd.com/
This is a very interesting other side to the subject ...... long but very well worth the effort of watching
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2021 12:13:53 GMT
pays to research your researchers.
this is based on an excerpt from an unpublished paper ..... there is only one name on the excerpt (the above renowned cardiologist) as oposed to the normal list of associates of the team.
the excerpt was published over a month ago and we are still waiting for a sight of the paper
incidentally this is the signiture on the publication
This is a very interesting other side to the subject ...... long but very well worth the effort of watching
I have to admit to getting bored with the density of the TB soup kitchen merry go round, so I'll just repeat my earlier comments. In 6 months time, vaccine information will start leaking out of the sieve. In 12 months time, the nhs will be reporting a sudden rise in heart and blood conditions. In 2 years time, msm will be demonising the vaccines, and all those that became social media experts and influencers
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Dec 27, 2021 12:25:47 GMT
pays to research your researchers.
this is based on an excerpt from an unpublished paper ..... there is only one name on the excerpt (the above renowned cardiologist) as oposed to the normal list of associates of the team.
the excerpt was published over a month ago and we are still waiting for a sight of the paper
incidentally this is the signiture on the publication
This is a very interesting other side to the subject ...... long but very well worth the effort of watching
I have to admit to getting bored with the density of the TB soup kitchen merry go round, so I'll just repeat my earlier comments. In 6 months time, vaccine information will start leaking out of the sieve. In 12 months time, the nhs will be reporting a sudden rise in heart and blood conditions. In 2 years time, msm will be demonising the vaccines, and all those that became social media experts and influencers didn't you click the link ? it takes you to this guy
...... he may have a point ..... but I want more than little snippets leaked from an unpublished paper to base it on ...... of course you might just want to buy some of the products advertised on his site.
The other one, between two very clever people is worth paying close attention to. It is not that easy to follow all of it but the Danish expert really is an expert.
Between the two of them they put a lot of it into clear focus.
Both of them are interested in finding out the actual facts of the situation. Whatever you believe it would make you better informed
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Dec 27, 2021 12:56:09 GMT
Nice to see you back Ross, hows work?
|
|
|
Post by ianali on Dec 27, 2021 15:04:59 GMT
Nice to see you back Ross, hows work? All a bit different now, too complicated with different vehicles and routes and shifts, so have started to apply for early retirement, which I could have started half a year ago, but thought I'd see how things go. Have decided it's better to be free whilst still young enough to do things. A bit less money, of course... but then when I looked at what I need to spend to be at work (petrol, car maintenance, food & drink) it's not that much less. Off for the Christmas holidays now. Hello Ross, and merry Christmas. My advice is retire as you can. It can be surprising just how expensive working can be.
|
|