|
|
Post by Fairsociety on May 9, 2023 14:34:15 GMT
I agree there is dishonesty in all walks of life not just the vaccine makers, but most of it is motivated by money and greed. How long did it take to make the connection between smoking and lung cancer, the tobacco industry were well aware years before it became 'official' there was a absolute link between lung cancer and smoking, it was a huge industry funding and sponsoring all sorts of sports and other venues, people were making plenty of money out of it, health came second.
They eventually came clean, and now label their products with all sorts of health warnings, the point I am getting at, that people know, and can read all these 'danger warnings' on tobacco products yet they still smoke them, but the fact they have been told the truth, and given the warnings, and it's left to their own personal choice whether or not they want to take that risk. That's the exact warning and informed information that should be on the Covid vaccine, "it is a trial drug in its infancy and the full adverse long term reaction and possible side-effects is not yet known, due to lack of data".
You will find people will still take it, but at least they've been warned, and that is the issue.
I'm a bit behind the times on the covid industry as I was following it and then I got bored and moved on to other things, but what I learnt from the older reports into side effects, the figures looked good in that the danger of not taking it far outweighed the danger of taking it. most problems were trivial like a bit of swelling or feeling ill for a few days. What happened here was she had the vaccine on Saturday, i had a long chat to her Sunday afternoon where she finished talking earlier than usual and said she felt dizzy and weak, then by Monday she could hardly breath and was rushed into hospital where her lungs were filled with fluid and the heart was about to have a heart attack where they said on two occasions she is likely to die. As far as that case is concerned that vaccine will go on the figures as no ill effects. I specifically asked my father if the doctors said anything about the vaccine, but they did not. You see how it works in practice. Just don't tell them anything. Make them feel they are wonderful with the presentational skills of the service. She could not even get a place in the stroke unit for a week as it was full up. Hmm, I wonder why. I was told this by a very reliable source, if you are administered any form of drug intravenously you are at risk within 48 hours of developing some sort of adverse reaction, once that 48 hours have elapsed you are probably out of the danger zone. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2023 14:52:22 GMT
I think only official expert people are allowed to speak about these things and only from official and approved platforms. Apparently, but as the W.H.O. have kindly said the pandemic emergency is over, perhaps it is time for that rule to be relaxed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2023 14:57:57 GMT
Bloody vaccine manufacturers, saving millions of lives all around the world. What a bunch of bastards. Absolutely, those 6 jabs have all been safe and effective. Huzzah!. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on May 9, 2023 15:19:45 GMT
It probably more likely told us they weren't prepared to have a experimental drug pumped into them, whereas the measles, TB and polio vaccines had been tried and tested over years on trials with groups of people.
Salk tested his experimental killed-virus vaccine on himself and his family in 1953, and a year later on 1.6 million children in Canada, Finland and the USA. The results were announced on 12 April 1955, and Salk's inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) was licensed on the same day.
Two years before it was licensed after trials, unlike Covid vaccine licensed after 'months', do you honestly believe the medical profession like consultants are stupid?
Some years ago I read a book "The River" (Edwin Hooper IIRC) which documented the rise of AIDS back to ground zero. His theory was that it started (in the early 1950s) when some American doctors vaccinated parts of Africa with a new polio vaccine. The way that vaccines were developed back then was that they took the virus that caused polio and tried to "attenuate" it - i.e. make it so weak that it didn't harm people but retained the markers that would identify it to the human immune system. The way that they did this was to transition it through chimpanzee kidneys until it no longer harmed chimpanzees. This may sound strange but biological media (of one kind or another) are still used for this purpose today. Unfortunately some of the chimpanzees whose kidneys were used for this purpose had SIV (the acknowledged precursor to HIV) and the vaccine - while working quite well in preventing polio - introduced the SIV virus to humans that eventually evolved into HIV and proved deadly to many millions of people. And is still incurable. There's a huge amount of evidence to back up this theory of how AIDS started but the medical profession have NEVER accepted it. And never will. It's like Covid. We all know that the chinese developed it by using "gain of function" on bat viruses - but the medical profession will NEVER accept it.
I wouldn't be surprised by that in the slightest.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on May 9, 2023 15:25:55 GMT
Absolutely, it's a very shady industry, and it's also been suggested that China had already developed a Covid vaccine that was going to make them a fortune, so the theory was, they developed the virus, let it out on to the world, then make their fortune out of the Vaccine they had already developed. Cunning plan? That's not far off of my own suspicions - although I don't think that profit from the vaccine was the motive. I suspect that it's got more to do with testing either western economic resilience or the feasibility of a biological weapon. Either way, why fight your enemies when you can simply ruin them and with plausible deniability? Well, either that or someone made a shit-tonne of money from post Covid market turmoil (indeed, there could be a fair bit of mileage in simply following the money). |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on May 9, 2023 15:51:32 GMT
Absolutely, it's a very shady industry, and it's also been suggested that China had already developed a Covid vaccine that was going to make them a fortune, so the theory was, they developed the virus, let it out on to the world, then make their fortune out of the Vaccine they had already developed. Cunning plan? That's not far off of my own suspicions - although I don't think that profit from the vaccine was the motive. I suspect that it's got more to do with testing either western economic resilience or the feasibility of a biological weapon. Either way, why fight your enemies when you can simply ruin them and with plausible deniability? Well, either that or someone made a shit-tonne of money from post Covid market turmoil (indeed, there could be a fair bit of mileage in simply following the money).Correct, 'After' 9/11 the experts noticed 'prior' to the 9/11 terrorist attacks a clear pattern in the stock market, a pattern that suggested those shares that would have profited or fallen after the attack had significantly altered, in other words those in the 'know' knew the terrorist attack was going to happen, so they adjusted their financial interests accordingly.
'follow the money' is probably the best indication of wrong doing, and believe you me, there is a lot of wrong doing going on out there.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on May 9, 2023 18:39:37 GMT
Yep. But overall I suspect that Covid was really a trial run.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on May 9, 2023 21:33:27 GMT
Big Pharma wont leave themselves open to too much scrutiny which would inevitably lead to lawsuits . The vaccines got us all out of our homes and opened up society but they also affected many people badly some in a lethal way . Ive had all the vaccines mainly due to the wife being in an at risk group but after adverse effects on myself I wont be having another ,the cure has become worse than the desease and we will take our chances going forward And BVL , hope Mum gets well soon |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on May 9, 2023 21:46:28 GMT
I think only official expert people are allowed to speak about these things and only from official and approved platforms. That is the policy of our hosts ProBoards. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on May 9, 2023 22:21:31 GMT
I think only official expert people are allowed to speak about these things and only from official and approved platforms. Apparently, but as the W.H.O. have kindly said the pandemic emergency is over, perhaps it is time for that rule to be relaxed. He is an expert. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on May 9, 2023 22:27:45 GMT
Big Pharma wont leave themselves open to too much scrutiny which would inevitably lead to lawsuits . The vaccines got us all out of our homes and opened up society but they also affected many people badly some in a lethal way . Ive had all the vaccines mainly due to the wife being in an at risk group but after adverse effects on myself I wont be having another ,the cure has become worse than the desease and we will take our chances going forward And BVL , hope Mum gets well soon Unfortunately the loss of sight is permanent. We think the rest will hopefully get good enough, but might not be as good as before. That is unless the incompetent bastards mess up again. Many people die from the hospital rather than the disease. Incompetence is rife and so is hiding data. This will not be the only dangerous drug on their rack. There will be others fraudulently passed as safe. Kind of like Russian roulette with pharmaceutical drugs. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on May 9, 2023 22:38:20 GMT
I'm a bit behind the times on the covid industry as I was following it and then I got bored and moved on to other things, but what I learnt from the older reports into side effects, the figures looked good in that the danger of not taking it far outweighed the danger of taking it. most problems were trivial like a bit of swelling or feeling ill for a few days. What happened here was she had the vaccine on Saturday, i had a long chat to her Sunday afternoon where she finished talking earlier than usual and said she felt dizzy and weak, then by Monday she could hardly breath and was rushed into hospital where her lungs were filled with fluid and the heart was about to have a heart attack where they said on two occasions she is likely to die. As far as that case is concerned that vaccine will go on the figures as no ill effects. I specifically asked my father if the doctors said anything about the vaccine, but they did not. You see how it works in practice. Just don't tell them anything. Make them feel they are wonderful with the presentational skills of the service. She could not even get a place in the stroke unit for a week as it was full up. Hmm, I wonder why. I was told this by a very reliable source, if you are administered any form of drug intravenously you are at risk within 48 hours of developing some sort of adverse reaction, once that 48 hours have elapsed you are probably out of the danger zone. We are within the 48 hours on this one, but I was unsurprised the hospital said nothing. We don't actually know when the stroke happened though as there was not a time she suddenly felt anything. What we do know is the doctor claims the heart and lung problem were caused by the stroke, not the other way around, meaning the stroke was probably Sunday night. But this is the weird thing. I asked the day after she went into hospital if there was any sign of damage and they said they tested her limbs and they were all ok, like she had feeling in her arms and legs but no mention of the eye. Surely if you have a stroke you would notice your loss of sight in one eye straight away, so the information given to me is illogical. I only found out about the eye a week later from my father. |
|
|
|
Post by seniorcitizen007 on May 10, 2023 5:55:34 GMT
When I asked a hospital doctor about the side effects of the widely used antibiotic Gentamicin he said that the possibility of having a bad reaction was "low". I then quoted an online source which said that 1 in 25 (4%) of people experience "Gentamicin toxicity", which takes from 5 weeks to 5 years to recover from (if one is going to recover, many people do not and are left permanently disabled) and people with kidney failure are more at risk ... an annoyed look came over his face and he angrily said: "You shouldn't be reading that!". He then wanted to give me Ciprofloxacin, saying that it is "Safe for kidneys" (I have kidney failure). I then quoted the European Medicines Agency's warning about the dangers of this antibiotic ("Ciprofloxacin toxicity") when used on people over 60 and people with "Reduced kidney function". This really exasperated him. These drugs are "dirt cheap" ... safer antibiotics are very much more expensive (100 to 200 times more expensive). When I asked if I could pay for a safer antibiotic I was told that I would have to go "fully private" for all my treatment. This happened in A & E ... when I decided to leave the doctor said I couldn't ... and stood in my way. A senior nurse intervened and said I could "refuse treatment", but wanted me to sign something. I refused ... because I was not given the opportunity to give a detailed reason why I was refusing. I just walked out.
Some time later, just prior to a minor surgical procedure, I was told I was going to be given Cotrimoxazole (another antibiotic that NICE do not recommend for people with Kidney failure .. if it is give the dosage must be halved). I said I didn't want it. After the op they said they'd given me it. I later asked what dose they'd given me (after I'd experienced very bad watery diarrhea ten days later ... a side effect of this drug) ... so far they haven't responded.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeg er on May 11, 2023 8:53:18 GMT
correlation does not imply causation
in other words, being 87 is quite relevant
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on May 11, 2023 12:51:45 GMT
correlation does not imply causation in other words, being 87 is quite relevant Of course it does, in a probabilistic way. |
|
