Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Helipilot4 said:

Bit of a hypocrite eh? As someone who says to “educate yourself” you only seem keen on looking at one half of the facts. The ones that benefit your own personal agenda. But when someone brings up facts opposing, they are fake.  

i dont think you have access to my browsing history? or do you?

if you did, you'll see i do my due diligence.

now grow up. at least use your brain to vote today.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 201
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

🤷‍♂️

Hi GrayHorizons,   I’m sorry to hear about your mother. I hope she sees the other side of cancer as a survivor.  I agree with everything in your post but I would add one thing. Should y

Has anyone spitting MSM talking points here bothered to look at data from countries ahead of us in the vaccination? Seems like a common sense thing to do, no? Israel, UK, Iceland, state of Hawaii

Posted Images

33 minutes ago, Hazy said:

"VAERS is the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System put in place in 1990. It is a voluntary reporting system that has been estimated to account for only 1% (see the Lazarus Report) of vaccine injuries. OpenVAERS is built from the HHS data available for download at vaers.hhs.gov."

How is that a counter argument?  The vaccine makers were being held accountable and then need legislative protection to stay in business.  Now, who holds them accountable?

wasnt an argument at all. where do you get that idea?

put words into your own mouth not mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GrayHorizons said:

i dont think you have access to my browsing history? or do you?

if you did, you'll see i do my due diligence.

now grow up. at least use your brain to vote today.

Nah pilots don’t grow up we just get bigger. 
 

im just here trying to defend people’s rights to make a decision. Just like the decision on who to vote for. Until that one gets taken away too. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Helipilot4 said:

Nah pilots don’t grow up we just get bigger. 
 

im just here trying to defend people’s rights to make a decision. Just like the decision on who to vote for. Until that one gets taken away too. 

i value everyone's decision too.

all i ask is that everyone makes the choice that's right for them, based on good information. and to accept that your choices will have a consequence. sometimes that will be a benefit, sometimes a negative. Own it either way.

there's so much bad information out there from both sides, and too many people willing to take that information at face value and put zero thought into how correct it is. 

I at least try. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hazy said:

"VAERS is the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System put in place in 1990. It is a voluntary reporting system that has been estimated to account for only 1% (see the Lazarus Report) of vaccine injuries. OpenVAERS is built from the HHS data available for download at vaers.hhs.gov."

How is that a counter argument?  The vaccine makers were being held accountable and then need legislative protection to stay in business.  Now, who holds them accountable?

Again, let's dig into your reference.  The report is misquoted, it actually says "Although 25% of ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported."  I had an adverse event from my jab: a slighty sore arm.  So, I am one of the 99% of un-reported adverse events, but I would not classify my ouchy arm as an injury.

The only part of the report specifically addressing VAERS is as follows:

"The goal of Aim 3 was to Comprehensively evaluate ESP:VAERS performance in a randomized trial, and in comparison to existing VAERS and Vaccine Safety Datalink data.

We had initially planned to evaluate the system by comparing adverse event findings to those in the Vaccine Safety Datalink project—a collaborative effort between CDC’s Immunization Safety Office and eight large managed care organizations. Through a randomized trial, we would also test the hypothesis that the combination of secure, computer-assisted, clinicianapproved, adverse event detection, and automated electronic reporting will substantially increase the number, completeness, validity, and timeliness of physician-approved case reports to VAERS compared to the existing spontaneous reporting system; however, due to restructuring at CDC and consequent delays in terms of decision making, it became impossible to move forward with discussions regarding the evaluation of ESP:VAERS performance in a randomized trial, and compare ESP:VAERS performance to existing VAERS and Vaccine Safety Datalink data. Therefore, the components under this particular Aim were not achieved."

So in short, they didn't gather enough evidence to make any firm assessment of VAERS.

Just doing my research, like you asked.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL so the apparatus to look for vaccine safety signals, VAERS, is suddenly "no longer valid" (IE the numbers are terrifying so we have to discredit it). Amazing how its been considered a valid source since 1991 until the covid vaccine came out. Since 1991 they have being saying 1-10% of adverse reactions get reported, so if anything its a drastic understatement of lack of vaccine safety. There has been more than 1 whistleblower on this issue.

So where are we, and medical professionals,l supposed to be looking to for information on safety, and where are we supposed to be reporting adverse events?

There is nothing else, in other words, RED FLAG for anyone who hasn't turned their brain to mush from the MSM. If we aren't looking for vaccine safety signals, then we won't find any issues. These are experimental injections, are still in phase 3 trials, thats right, we are the experiment.

This video won't be surprising to most who have spotted the obvious lies we are being fed, but others here will just brush this off as nonsense, or a "one off" example. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Grug said:

Again, let's dig into your reference.  The report is misquoted, it actually says "Although 25% of ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported."  I had an adverse event from my jab: a slighty sore arm.  So, I am one of the 99% of un-reported adverse events, but I would not classify my ouchy arm as an injury.

The only part of the report specifically addressing VAERS is as follows:

"The goal of Aim 3 was to Comprehensively evaluate ESP:VAERS performance in a randomized trial, and in comparison to existing VAERS and Vaccine Safety Datalink data.

We had initially planned to evaluate the system by comparing adverse event findings to those in the Vaccine Safety Datalink project—a collaborative effort between CDC’s Immunization Safety Office and eight large managed care organizations. Through a randomized trial, we would also test the hypothesis that the combination of secure, computer-assisted, clinicianapproved, adverse event detection, and automated electronic reporting will substantially increase the number, completeness, validity, and timeliness of physician-approved case reports to VAERS compared to the existing spontaneous reporting system; however, due to restructuring at CDC and consequent delays in terms of decision making, it became impossible to move forward with discussions regarding the evaluation of ESP:VAERS performance in a randomized trial, and compare ESP:VAERS performance to existing VAERS and Vaccine Safety Datalink data. Therefore, the components under this particular Aim were not achieved."

So in short, they didn't gather enough evidence to make any firm assessment of VAERS.

Just doing my research, like you asked.

If this chart of under reported raw data doesn't make you pause and question these jabs, then great for you.

https://openvaers.com/covid-data/mortality

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has any of the communist vax pushers looked into why corona virus vaccines have never been approved for human use, or never made it past the animal trails for the last couple decades they've been trying?

I suggest you look into it, they were tested on 3 different types of animals.

 

Also, comparing this "vaccine" to previous vaccines that actually infer immunity, not just symptom reduction, is clearly not a valid comparison. Its just a common talking point fed to you by the TV.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wikipedia? Oh, please. They are a paid part of the establishment, who will slander anyone who goes against the narrative.

 

 

PS- If someone is being discredited by being labelled "far right" or "racist" rather than actually countering the content of their message, you can bet they are probably saying something worth listening to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...