Goddess

Here's a question for your doctor: Why did the death rates for covid in Ontario go UP by 39%, the year after the vaccines rolled out? Why did the hospitalizations for covid in Ontario go UP by 31% after the vaccines rolled out? Weren't the vaccines supposed to reduce hospitalizations and deaths? It's especially odd, given the "variants of concern" by this time were less deadly that the original strain. Comparison of COVID-19 Hospitalizations and Deaths in 2022 and 2021 (publichealthontario.ca)

Nope. Just have followed the experts who have been right about everything all along. And I have have enjoyed reading medical studies and journals for many years, since my time in healthcare. So it jives with my interests.

Hopefully you have read the post I made there about how to read, understand and evaluate medical studies. Please put some effort into it - because it sounds like your plan is to quickly Google a study that says what you want it to say, without really checking it out, since you think you're going to post many studies in less than 24 hours. Dialamah tried that a couple of times, it didn't work out too well for her and now she just "likes" posts that call me names and personally insult me. ?

I would suggest you first read the studies and data already on the thread. I've likely already rebutted,with links to proofs, anything you have to say. I've no interest in going over the entire thread and all the research I've posted for the last year. You're extremely late to the party. It's up to you to catch up.

No. I called you anti-science because you repeatedly tried to rebut actual scientific studies and datasets with cliches and nothing else. THEN you posted some CDC links. The CDC which has repeatedly lied to the public. NOW I'm calling you anti-science because you reject scientific studies and datasets, in favour of CDC cliches and propaganda.

3 problems with your post: 1. Studies and data do not support your contention that the covid vaccine is essential to immunity. The studies and data show that the more covid jabs you get, the more your immune system is damaged. By jabs 3 and 4, your immune system is in the negative. In fact, your immune system takes a serious nosedive for 2 weeks post-vax, bounces up a bit for a few more weeks, then nosedives quickly. It's why you now need 3-4 jabs per year. Besides the studies that show this (see my trickle thread for them), the data on infections and deaths clearly show that the vaccine is not preventing transmission, namely - fully jabbed and boosted people are MORE likely to get covid repeatedly. This cannot even be denied any longer. Everyone sees it happening. The covid jab is not producing immunity to covid. 2. This statement reflects very poor knowledge of how your immune system works. Take care of your immune system and its actually quite the biological wonder. Studies show natural immunity is best. Always. Getting covid helps your immune system develop antibodies to ALL parts of the virus, not just the spike, as the jabs supposedly do. Natural immunity to covid is far more robust. Again, see the studies on the thread. 3. Unless you are very elderly, very obese or already have one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel, your "potential for severe illness and death" is already near 0%, vaccine or no vaccine. Peddle your fear-porn elsewhere.

Thanks. Part of it was that I already had a basic knowledge of how immune systems function and other medical knowledge. It allowed me to identify the science charlatans quickly, follow the true science, avoid propaganda and to assimilate and add to information I already knew was scientifically correct. I'm also a very good researcher. If I don't know something, I at least know how and where to find the information. Contrary to what I've been accused of here - while my sister's vax injury did contribute to my search for answers - I've been a truth seeker for most of my life and some of my life experiences have sharpened my bullshyte detector quite well. The lies were obvious from the beginning, ie: Ivermectin as horse dewormer. It was literally shocking to see the CDC outright lie to the public on that one.

I've addressed and expanded on each point already in this thread. You're about a year and half too late to address any of these points.

REALITY CHECK: In recent years, we've seen numerous claims supposedly rooted in "scientific consensus." Yet, these self-proclaimed experts were merely disseminating flawed propaganda. Let's take a look at the smorgasbord of blunders: 1. Covid transmission: Those 'brilliant minds' couldn't even figure out the basics of viral transmission principles. Why didn't they perform experiments consisting of a control group? 2. Asymptomatic spread: Surprise, surprise, they got this one wrong too. It took ages for them to realize that there is nothing such as an asymptomatic spread spread. But to be honest, I am convinced they knew that since the beginning. 3. PCR testing: Flawed, over-sensitive, and generally misleading. Bravo, consensus! Bravo, Drosten! No test, no pandemic - which is why that PCR test was introduced. 4. No early treatment: They were so adamant about waiting for the experimental shot that they discriminated against those who called for early interventions. Imagine if everyone was encouraged to take vitamin D, which would have caused a new record low for excess mortality while being in the middle of a dangerous pandemic!? 5. Fatality rate: Wildly overestimated (thanks to the fraudulent PCR test), causing unnecessary panic, which most likely caused the observed excess mortality. Great job, guys. 6. Lockdowns: Did they work? They did not. But we do know they wreaked economies, mental and physical health. They knew it, but they continued to harass society nonetheless. 7. Community triggers: Arbitrary thresholds that sowed confusion and failed to stop the spread. 8. Business closures: Crushing small businesses and livelihoods without any benefits. None of this made any sense. 9. School closures: Ruining kids' education and social development for what? Big Pharma profits and Bill Gates' wildest fantasies? 10. Quarantining the healthy: Treating everyone as a potential biohazard, is a serious crime. One is either healthy or sick, everything else is pseudoscientific. 11. Impact on youth: The youth, who were never truly at risk from a respiratory virus, ended up sacrificing their well-being to accommodate some political agenda. 12. Hospital overload: Overblown predictions that never materialized, leaving healthcare workers twiddling their thumbs or dancing, while cancer screening appointments were cancelled. 13. Plexiglass barriers: A classic example of hygiene theater that did not have any effect on our health. 14. Social distancing: Can lead to loneliness and social isolation, which increase the production of the stress hormone cortisol and can lead to negative health outcomes. There is no evidence that social distancing measures have directly decreased excess mortality anywhere in the world. 15. Outdoor spread: Fearmongering about outdoor transmission, despite the evidence to the contrary. 16. Masks: Prior to 2020 virologists said that masks are ineffective. They suddenly changed their opinion in March 2020 and were proven wrong. Masks harm those wearing them. Fail! 17. Variant impact: Overhyping the threat of variants, just to keep the fear alive. 18. Natural immunity: Dismissing the importance of natural immunity in favor of vaccines, because why acknowledge the body's natural defenses? The answer is: corruption and profits. 19. Vaccine efficacy: The vaccines were supposed to be our saviors, but they turned out to be more like a weapon of mass murder. 20. Vaccine injury: Brushing off concerns about side effects and adverse reactions, because who cares about a few casualties in the pursuit of "progress"? Did they get anything right? Well, I suppose even a broken clock is right twice a day. But it's hard to give credit when the list of mistakes is so long and illustrious. "Consensus" is often code for "groupthink" and maybe, just maybe, we should question the experts more often.

A new paper reviewed 2,168 studies and concluded that masks decrease oxygen saturation, increase blood CO2, heart rate and blood pressure, and cause headache and dizziness. That is, symptoms wrongly classified as “long Covid”. Frontiers | Physio-metabolic and clinical consequences of wearing face masks—Systematic review with meta-analysis and comprehensive evaluation (frontiersin.org) ^^^THIS^^^ + Vaccine Injury = "Long Covid"

@Contrarian

And Canada's "Top Doctor" is getting information from the CDC, who - contrary to what contrarian states (with nothing to back himself up) - are NOT conducting thorough investigations and their information has thus far, been mostly WRONG. delivery.php (ssrn.com) DISCUSSION If a public health agency chooses to campaign against misinformation, it is important that the agency accurately present basic statistical information. Our search identified 25 instances of demonstrably false information offered by the CDC. In at least three instances, this was documented in the lay media or medical journals.8–10 In 16 instances, the CDC was informed of their error, and fully corrected their error in 11/25 (44%) instances. In 80% of instances, the CDC’s errors exaggerated the risk of COVID-19, and yet in only one did it exaggerate risks from the COVID-19 vaccine. Most instances (64%) pertained to children. Of the 16 errors that pertained to COVID-19 risk in children, 94% exaggerated their COVID-19 risks. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4381627 Many instances of misinformation from the CDC were related to pediatric mortality data, exaggerating the impact of COVID-19 in children. While the European CDC provided reassuring data on SARS-CoV-2 in children,11 the errors we found show the US CDC has overstated risks. In all identified instances where the CDC made an error in reporting pediatric COVID-19 deaths, they overstated the number, while understating deaths for adults. Many of these claims about pediatric deaths have stemmed from the CDC’s COVID Data Tracker Demographics page, which has been cited by journalists, the CDC, and the CDC Director

Here is my advice: I've followed them from the beginning and they've been right about everything.

? That's so delusional, it's funny.

This paper studied 1105 patients who had stable glomerular kidney disease in 2020 before mRNA, and then followed them after receiving one or more of the COVID-19 vaccines. Glomerular kidney disease can worsen to complete kidney failure and dialysis, so the consequences are significant if there is a problem with mRNA, Spike protein, and progression of disease. As shown in the table, for the double vaccinated, there was more than a two-fold increase in progression of kidney disease. That means a loss of renal function which is usually permanent for the vaccinated. Using multivariable adjustment, this effect persisted. The inference is the worsening of kidney disease is attributable to the vaccine and none of the other traditional risk factors (high blood pressure etc.). A Population-Based Analysis of the Risk of Glomerular Diseas... : Journal of the American Society of Nephrology (lww.com) In the primary analysis, exposure to any COVID-19 vaccine was not significantly associated with relapse of glomerular disease; however, the findings differed by vaccine dose. Whereas the risk of glomerular disease relapse after the first vaccine dose was negligible, the risk increased after the second or third vaccine dose. It should be acknowledged that the HR estimates had wide confidence intervals and need to be validated in an independent cohort with larger sample size to generate more precise estimates. This finding is biologically plausible, however, considering the enhanced immune response that has been observed after repeated COVID-19 vaccination, including higher antibody titers22 and more prominent systemic symptoms of immune activation such as fever, chills, and muscle aches.6,23 Conclusions In a population-level cohort of patients with glomerular disease, a second or third dose of COVID-19 vaccine was associated with higher relative risk but low absolute increased risk of relapse.

Output1 [Document1] (johnzogbystrategies.com) X02-30.spo [Document4] (johnzogbystrategies.com) Key highlights from the survey of 1,038 adults The survey found that 67% of respondents received one or more COVID-19 vaccines, while 33% are unvaccinated. Furthermore, among those vaccinated, 6% received one dose, 28% received two doses, 21% received three doses, and 12% took four or more. Of those receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, 15% say they’ve been diagnosed by a medical practitioner with a new condition within a matter of weeks to several months after taking the vaccine. That 15% figure translates to likely just over 30 million vaccine impacted adults. Other key demographics of newly diagnosed medical conditions after COVID-19 vaccines show: 17% of those receiving two doses 13% of respondents had three shots 30% of those ages 18-29 23% of those ages 30-49 6% of those ages 50-64 4% of those older than 65 7% of whites 21% of African-Americans 32% of Hispanics 15% of liberals 14% of moderates 8% of conservatives A follow-up question provided a list of medical conditions and asked diagnosed respondents to “select all that apply.” Among those who were medically diagnosed with a new condition within a matter of weeks to several months, the top five cited conditions were: 21% blood clots 19% heart attack 18% liver damage 17% leg clots/lung clots 15% stroke Overall, 67% reported that getting the vaccine was a good decision, 24% were neutral and 10% regret it. Survey participants were then asked if someone they personally know had been medically diagnosed with a new medical condition within the same time frame. Overall, 26% reported yes, while 63% reported no. Looking at age cohorts: 34% of those ages 18-29 say they know someone who was diagnosed, as did 30% of those ages 30-49, 21% of those ages 50-64, and 18% of those older than 65 Again, respondents were offered the same list of conditions and asked to “select all that apply.” The top five cited conditions were: 28 % blood clots 20% stroke 19% autoimmune 16% lung clots 15% heart attack Among those under age 50 – 62% report receiving a COVID-19 vaccine vs. 38% who have had none. Among those receiving any COVID-19 vaccine, almost one quarter — 22% — report being medically diagnosed within a matter of weeks to several months after taking a shot. The top five cited new conditions include: 21% autoimmune 20% blood clots 19% stroke/lung clots 17% liver damage/leg clots/heart attack 15% disrupted menstrual cycle/Guillain-Barré/Bell’s palsy Regarding describing the conditions, 47% report mild, 43% report serious and 10% report severe/still recovering. Describing their experience with taking one or more COVID-19 vaccines, 58% report it was a good decision, 28% are neutral and 14% regret it. Finally, 30% of those ages 18-49 report knowing someone else who has been medically diagnosed within a matter of weeks to several months after taking a COVID-19 vaccine. The top five cited medically diagnosed conditions of the person known by those under age 50 are: 30% blood clots 23% stroke 20% autoimmune 18% leg clots/lung clots 17% heart attack The responding adults in this group had this age distribution: – 30% of those ages 18-29 – 23% of those ages 30-49 – 6% of those ages 50-64 – 4% of those older than 65 These data show that it is working age adults and not the elderly that account for most vaccine harmful impacts. This is consistent with reports from insurance companies of recent major increases in deaths among working age people not explained by COVID infection, but from vaccines. These data are consistent with countless studies and reports about vaccine induced health impacts, both injuries and deaths that result from damage to blood. Moreover, so many of the survey respondents had three or four vaccine shots, and research has found that with increasing jabs the more your immune system is degraded. Thus explaining so many adverse vaccine impacts. These results also justify considerable concerns about giving COVID vaccines to children. There is far more risk from medical impacts than any benefits because data have always shown children do not face major risks from COVID infection.

Again, Dr. Pierre Kory, who has testified before the US Senate committees and has worked tirelessly (and been censored for it) to treat covid patients on the frontlines, since the beginning. CV19 Vax Deaths & Injuries are an Ignored Humanitarian Catastrophe – Dr. Pierre Kory | Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog World renowned CV19 critical care and pulmonary expert Dr. Pierre Kory says his clinic is seeing an explosion of people seeking treatment for CV19 vaccine sickness and injury. Dr. Kory reports, “We just started seeing more and more vaccine injured, and they are really quite ill. It’s a very complex illness. We are working on treatments that work and understanding the path of physiology. . . . By the way, there is not a lot published on vaccine injury. As you know, they don’t want to call attention to it. The big high impact (medical) journals will not publish on it. . . . It’s hard to become an expert on vaccine injury when it’s a disease that is being ignored. . .. Nobody has a post vaccine injury clinic, and there are really no suggestions on how to treat it.” Dr. Kory is developing new treatment protocols for treating the vax injured. Dr. Kory and his team at Front Line Covid 19 Critical Care Alliance (flccc.net) have an “Updated Post-Vaccine Syndrome Protocol.” Dr. Kory contends, “This is a humanitarian catastrophe, and it has been ignored. It has been suppressed. It has been censored, but you cannot hide from this data when it’s in your face. The system is going to have to address this in some way at some point. . . . We figured out how to treat Covid, and we did a good job . . . . Now, we have to try and do the same thing with the vaccine injured, and it’s a much different problem.” In closing, Dr. Kory points out one big thing with all the CV19 vaccines, “It’s all experimental. That’s right, experimental. We don’t have long-term safety data. We don’t know the long-term consequences. We don’t know the true rise in cancers and what it has to do with the immune system. These are all worries and concerns. . . . There has been no approved vaccine used in America since the beginning of Covid. . . . it’s all experimental.”

Unexplained high death counts in N.B. concerning, health minister acknowledges | CBC News Golly gee whiz, I wonder what it could be? ?

Multiple studies have NOT shown this. Multiple CBC headlines, however, have. As you can see from my post above (and this entire thread), for teens and young men - the cost/benefit analysis does NOT show the benefits outweigh the risks. In fact, not for anyone under 50 who has a normal measure of health. If your doctor is telling teens and young men otherwise, he is mo-ron. Sorry, but there's no other way to say it. Myocarditis and athletes dropping dead on the field has been an issue since 2021, and any doctor who hasn't taken note of this and given informed consent to his patients......is a mo-ron.

So, independent scientists (not the CDC or FDA, of course) has identified the mechanism for why myocarditis is affecting young men and why athletes are dropping dead like flies. I did post other articles that hypothesized about catecholamines being the trigger, on this thread before. This is the first paper I've seen that acknowledges and discusses the growing number of athlete deaths. Cureus | Catecholamines Are the Key Trigger of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine-Induced Myocarditis: A Compelling Hypothesis Supported by Epidemiological, Anatomopathological, Molecular, and Physiological Findings | Article @dialamah of course, mocked and derided me for pointing out that the medical stopping rule is that "it is the vaccines until proven otherwise." But as you can see here - that IS the medical standard: (Or WAS, until these "vaccines" threw all medical standards out the window.) From the paper: Myocarditis and sudden death after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination Myocarditis induced by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines is an indisputable complication observed particularly in young males [1-4] as demonstrated by multiple studies in different populations [1-11]. Indeed, two studies reported that COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-induced myocarditis disproportionately affected adolescents (reporting odds ratio (ROR): 22.3; 95% confidence interval (CI): 19.2-25.9), 18-29-year-olds (ROR: 6.6; 95% CI: 5.9-7.5), and males (ROR: 9.4; 95% CI: 8.3-10.6) [5,6]. These findings were supported by another large registry study that identified increased myocarditis risk following SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination, with the highest risk detected in people aged 18-24 years, particularly after the second dose, where 8.1-fold increased risk after the BNT162b2 SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine (95% CI: 6.7-9.9) and 30-fold increased risk after the mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (95% CI: 21-43) were reported [7]. An Israeli government dataset demonstrated 13.6-fold increased myocarditis risk (95% CI: 9.3-19.2) among males aged between 16 and 19 years compared to the expected following historical data, while a ninefold increased myocarditis risk (95% CI: 4.5-17.8) was recorded when compared to unvaccinated people of similar age and sex during the same period [8]. In a 23 million-resident area, the myocarditis risk after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination was increased across all populations but was particularly high among males aged 16-24 years after the second dose of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, where 5.3-fold (95% CI: 3.7-7.7) and 13.8-fold (95% CI: 8.1-23.7) increased myocarditis risk was recorded, respectively [9]. Among all population studies that universally detected increased myocarditis risk after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination, a nationwide fully controlled Israeli dataset identified a strict correlation between both first and second SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine doses and an increase in emergency calls, particularly in those between the ages of 16 and 39 years, after adjustments for confounders [10]. The fact that two peaks were observed chronologically following the two SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine doses strongly reinforced the correlation. Not only were myocarditis risks identified, but a great burden following these cardiac events was also described [7]. Indeed, young males with comorbidities may experience dramatic cardiac remodeling following SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination [11]. Although preliminary comparisons between COVID-19 infection and SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines demonstrated similar increased myocarditis risk in athletes and people aged <40 years [12-14], the risk of consequential heart arrhythmia was significantly higher after vaccination than after COVID-19 [12], possibly supporting the apparent higher incidence of sudden deaths after COVID-19 vaccination than after COVID-19. Correspondingly, although an increase in sudden deaths among young people has been reported since the 1990s [16], the incidence of sudden deaths among athletes appears to have increased sharply in 2021 [17]. Chronologically, this coincides with the increased proportion of vaccinated athletes, with far more males affected than females, and the increase was particularly high in 2021 [5]. In all three cases, CD3+ T lymphocytes and CD20+ B lymphocytes were highly present, while macrophages, eosinophils, and other immune cells were almost absent, indicating a lymphocyte-specific induced inflammatory state. These findings supported the hypothesis that all three cases may have been triggered by a hypercatecholaminergic state, as adrenaline and noradrenaline tend to activate lymphocytes while inhibiting monocytes, macrophages, and eosinophils [31,32]. Unlike cases of post-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine myocarditis, the autopsies from deaths due to cardiovascular events after COVID-19 infection and other types of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine did not demonstrate contraction bands in the cardiomyocytes or any other indication of damage caused by excessive catecholaminergic activity in any tissue [33], demonstrating the specificness of the damage caused by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines. The bridge between myocarditis and sudden death after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination: a hyperadrenergic state Autopsies have demonstrated that catecholamines triggered myocarditis following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. The bridge connecting myocarditis and sudden death is found in the chronic hyperadrenergic state, a plausible and demonstrated cause [21-23]. Excessive long-term adrenaline and noradrenaline release, particularly at rest, is an independent predictor of sudden death [34,35]. The adrenal glands have been repeatedly demonstrated to be a major site of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA accumulation and SARS-CoV-2 spike protein production, indicating that both the adrenal cortex and medulla were affected. A report evaluating spike protein production after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination determined that the adrenal glands were one of the highest SARS-CoV-2 spike protein-producing tissues, demonstrating that the spike protein production in these glands increased with time [36]. Furthermore, notable, robust, and dense SARS-CoV-2 RNA expression and spike protein presence were detected in the adrenal medulla of animal models and the overall adrenal glands in humans [37]. Despite the lack of a direct comparison, post-COVID-19 autopsies demonstrated that while SARS-CoV-2 mRNA was detected diffusely, including in the adrenal glands [39], its concentration in these glands was not as specific as that described after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. That high SARS-CoV-2 mRNA concentration and corresponding abnormalities in the chromaffin cells that could lead to a catecholamine storm was not the only demonstrated finding. Conclusions The epidemiological findings of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine-induced myocarditis, which is overrepresented in young males, and the preliminary reports of an increase in sudden deaths, particularly in athletes, while absent after COVID-19 infection present highly concordant molecular justifications for the physiological differences in anatomopathological findings and catecholamine activity, which is more intense in active young males. We may conclude that supported by biological, clinical, and epidemiological findings, enhanced catecholamine activity or a hypercatecholaminergic state provides sufficient evidence for the highly plausible catecholamine theory of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA or spike protein-mediated myocardial complications to be considered a strong hypothesis.

Contrarian is just repeating propaganda he was told 2 and half years ago - he never actually checked it out. See? No links. Ever. To anything. It's just headline propaganda. There are no "peer-reviewed journals for all to see." Adverse reactions are not being "thoroughly investigated and monitored." I've posted the actual information from the CDC where they admit they haven't done this and pointed fingers at the FDA "Aren't they supposed to do this?" They had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the reality of what is happening to a suffering public before they FINALLY admitted that YES! myocarditis and menstrual problems are an issue. Yes, we were told mRNA technology had been in development for 20 years. And that satisfied most of the public. Few thought like I did - "Hmmmmm, knowing it takes about 10 years for a drug to be brought to market, WHY have we not seen this tech used before now?" What the public was NOT told, was that the technology was never brought to market because certain hurdles were never overcome - namely - all the animals died after being reinfected and their immune systems and fertility were trashed. That's kind of important. Contrarian (and others) have bought everything fed to them without question. That’s their right. But there are patent issues with the narratives and sadly, they choose to continue, incurious about their own health and that of the children whom we threw under the bus for nothing. That is on them. And all he (and others) has to do to challenge this thread is bring actual data. None of them seem to be able to provide anything other than cliches ("rigorously tested" "thoroughly monitored" "transparent data" "latest safety information") and CBC headlines. Where is the actual data? I ask. And they scurry away.

Doctors are not gods. Doctors orchestrated the holocaust. Doctors are not immune to government propaganda. When the German government wanted to exterminate Jews, it was doctors who suggested using the gas chambers they had invented to get rid of the disabled. 50% of doctors graduated in the BOTTOM half of their class.

Then why do you reject the scientific method? And why do you advise others to reject it? And why you support scientific censorship?

He is saying he was content to be led along during the pandemic like a pig with a nose ring and that he had zero interest in understanding anything himself, so he took the intellectually lazy route of getting his science from CBC headlines.