Originally Posted by
accountinquestion
Originally Posted by
redietz
I would recommend to expand your horizons. If you haven't been aware of long term effects, you haven't been looking, frankly. It's not like these were my preferred directions -- I'm a child of moon landings and fervent optimism regarding science. I suggest as starting points the essay published in the British Medical Journal a few months back regarding the lack of evidence-based medicine and the corrosion of the entire clinical trial process. The BMJ is quite conservative and the oldest of the medical journals. Also, Phil Harper's substack writings regarding the Pfizer documents that a Texas court forced Pfizer to release. Pfizer wanted to sit on them for, get this, 75 years.
If you watch the Been lecture, you'll early on get to the explanation of the zero efficacy points.
FYI -- the Phase 3 trials for the Pfizer vaccine should be completed sometime in early 2024. That is not a typo.
I'm fairly certain there are not that many longterm side-effects. The heart-inflamation thing is not going on longterm.
You really put a lot of effort jumping around .. I wish I knew the types of invalid arguments but this "you need to expands your horizons" won't cut it. Almost all side-effects are over within 2 months and if they aren't, please tell me about them.
"Thus, they may (I said may) be at more risk for all kinds of health issues." you said. oookay. I mean this statement isn't exactly not true but it is near meaningless.
THe vaccines have been used for quite some time now and I have yet to hear about all these longterm effects we were warned of by the anti-vaxxers.
Yes I can expand my horizons to nonsense and find an opposing view but I fail to see value in that approach.
Pfizer not wanting to release info is not anything surprising. That is standard operating procedure. All it would do it help them be sued. I believe they were given government money and such so we could argue that this should be an exception but it does *not* point to anything nefarious.
I'm also not sure what you're getting at about clinical trials and trying to tie it in. Yes, they have many issues but that doesn't mean they always have issues. Nor do this lack of a full trial point to anything either. It was clear that such an exception was needed.
People seem to confuse the side-effects we've had over the years from meds for chronic disease and make that directly comparable to the vaccines. These few time shots that (from my understanding) are just proteins aren't near as bad. They're not really actively doing anything but existing for the body to respond to and destroy. My guess is that most drugs that we've learned had side-effects (with hindsight) may have had those side-effects go unnoticed if the victims only took these drugs 3 times.
Welp we'll see in a few years when we all drop off from cancer.
Well, here's the questions. Have you read the BMJ essay regarding lack of evidence based medicine in modern clinical trial processes? Have you read the Phil Harper Ivermectin series on substack? Have you actually read the reports on forums, on YouTube, of people with long term vaccine injuries?
Because if you haven't done those things, and spent serious time with them, what's the point of my responding in any way? There are literally dozens of people who have real expertise whose reporting is available if you want to find it. I'm just doing a summary from a professional gambling perspective and from the perspective of someone who has a good sense of how propaganda is usually structured. The following are just easily available -- they aren't particularly damning. What bothers me isn't that the occasional end of the bell curve vaccine injury is happening. It's that there is almost no mainstream reporting of those injuries.
There are dozens of these kinds of critiques out there -- I tried to find one Been interview that was the best I'd seen because the injured person had a biology doctorate and was walking us through how impossible it was to get medical coverage for her injuries. She patiently went through the identification of injury process, spending a lot of money, and was a terrific interview. I couldn't find it immediately, however, as I am not a Been subscriber.
The majority of the heart issues "resolve," but they resolve with scarring, which means from an immediate basic functional perspective, all is usually well from a superficial won't-die-today perspective after a couple of months. But the scarring is there months and months later and may be permanent. So it affects people long-term.
One of the disturbing, propaganda type things regarding the vaccine-injured that Been interviews -- these people are clearly still damaged, but as participants in the government study, they have been cleared and labeled as "recovered and cured."
If you haven't looked into these things, I don't blame you. I'd prefer to not have learned this stuff. But my preferences take a back seat to reality recognition.
A lot of this comes back to laziness. If answers matter, then doing a two-page google search of "vaccine injuries" isn't going to cut it. But if that's what you think research is, then you learn what you deserve.