chedca21

Ioannidis did a antigen survey and found the vast majority of cases were mild; https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/340124

A survey by the most cited epidemiologist alive is not a forecast for one. It is the best appeal to authority one can make. I've seen it shown that h1n1 in england in 2009 had a IFR of 0.05% which is greater than the revised figure for covid.

Amazing how all the proof in the world makes such little difference to the average Luddite who will just defer to authority regardless. Stanley Milgram was clearly right about everything he said.

VAERS includes thousands of reports of death including broad anaphylaxis following their vaccination for CV. So what are you saying? Those lives are an acceptable cost for the convenience of skipping failsafes?

You're essentially giving full confidence to an industry - so why stop at covid? Shouldn't you prophylactically vaccinate yourself against all the viruses on earth?

That's like saying you don't need to look both ways before crossing the street because its not the status quo

The risk: benefit analysis that supports vaccination is considering the earliest standards of care we had which were criminally misguided - no steroids allowed, plug patient respiration up with a machine to not spread the virus ,

These protocols are what killed people mostly and ultimately they are what is being used to justify universal recommendations for a vaccine.

Did their stances actually contribute to public health policy, if so then they bare responsibility unfortunately. Armchair biosecurity advocates should be left off the hook.

But wait 15 minutes to see if your child gets anaphylaxis from them. We could have tested for allergy before giving the vaccine but its more convenient to have you wait around after.

Don't worry if you experience allergic shock we have epinephrine on standby. It might not work and its use is associated with Alzheimer's onset but don't worry! Safe and effective!

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425/rr-31

Covid-19: politicisation, “corruption,” and suppression of science

"Professor John Ioannidis of Stanford University, quotes an infection fatality rate (IFR) for Covid of 0.00-0.57% (0.05% for under 70s), far lower than originally feared and no different to severe flu" -March 2020

The bigger scandal is how covid case:fatality rate was so much higher in some places than the global average. https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/why-some-doctors-...

Pfizer's clinical trial showed 95% efficacy as a "relative risk reduction" when researchers checked the clinical trial data (which FDA wanted to withhold for 55 years but a Texas judge ordered its release) , for the actual risk reduction it was shown to be a negative value. Here is one resource on the subject https://www.pandata.org/understanding-relative-risk-reductio... I tried to find a better reference but can not find the exact one I'm looking for which came from a Canadian university (ryerson I believe)

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/wait-what-fda-wants...

And young male athletes with the greatest development of blood supply in the deltoid represent the most common demographic affected by acute cardiovascular injury post vaccine. Coincidence?

The vaccines were not built to be aspirated, once the plunger is up they can not be reset. It represents a fundamental lapse in standard harm reduction.

Also "wait 15 mins to see if emergency care is needed" could well have been replaced by allergy screening given before the injection. Many thousands of cases of anaphylaxis from the shot have been documented some of which were fatal, all avoidable with allergy screening which is practically free.

The danger of contracting covid was inflated relatively by initial standards of care that later proved harmful; https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/why-some-doctors-...

Also using steroids like dexamethasone were a later advent in treating covid that helped a lot. (They should have been standard of care right away like they would have been for any other respiratory illness).

These early follies increased the perceived need for a vaccine then and today still; risk : benefit analysis for the vaccines consider worst possible scenarios for covid, which include defunct practices like high PIP ventilator use and forgoing of common first-line treatments

Machines not functioning? Same scrambled voter rolls? "Sorry it says you already votes absentee"? Where oversight of elections was too thorough it got changed to election month - Florida can count millions of ballots on election day but other states need more time?

Truly one has to bury their head in the sand if they are to stand by election integrity in 2022

B-b-but its non-ionizing!!

"Cigarette smoke doesn't get hot enough to burn you and is therefore safe" -tobacco companies

If you take an intramuscular injection without aspirating the needle to make sure it's not found a blood vessel in the deltoid, you risk cardiovascular damage pointlessly. The standard of practice is so absurd and flawed yet its going to take years longer before people like you become aware of how badly we've been mislead.

If T-cell count and function is normal immunity should last. The idea that immunity wanes is coming from universities looking at antibodies (a different immune cell) as markers for vaccine efficacy. Industry prefers that way because waning antibodies means they'll sell more "boosters"