Right. And the first weeks following vaccination leave people more vulnerable to serious infection. No coincidence that these hospitalizations are happening just as the vaccines are rolling out. This study in the UK looked at how this is used to obfuscate vaccine efficacy data since, when you break it down more finely, there is a huge su…
Right. And the first weeks following vaccination leave people more vulnerable to serious infection. No coincidence that these hospitalizations are happening just as the vaccines are rolling out. This study in the UK looked at how this is used to obfuscate vaccine efficacy data since, when you break it down more finely, there is a huge surge in deaths immediately after vaccine rollout--but these deaths get categorized as "unvaccinated" and therefore make the all cause mortality higher in that group. chrome-extension://gphandlahdpffmccakmbngmbjnjiiahp/https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin-Neil-2/publication/356756711_Latest_statistics_on_England_mortality_data_suggest_systematic_mis-categorisation_of_vaccine_status_and_uncertain_effectiveness_of_Covid-19_vaccination/links/61aa3d6750e22929cd4348cb/Latest-statistics-on-England-mortality-data-suggest-systematic-mis-categorisation-of-vaccine-status-and-uncertain-effectiveness-of-Covid-19-vaccination.pdf?origin=publication_detail
When are we going to stop looking for truth in any of these ridiculous tests and vaers reports? They've never told the truth from the beginning, so that should be some indication that it will never happen. Am I looking at this wrong?
"Adverse events from vaccines are common but underreported, with less than one percent reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)."
Almost every "scientific" paper I see on this subject uses the VAERS numbers to sloppily-prop-up the slogan "rare" (in reference to side-effects). But an ACTUAL examination of the reporting rate came up with an appropriate adjective with which to characterize the frequency of "injuries", (which INCLUDES deaths). The Harvard study proved that these events are "common", at least 100 times more common that the VAERS will ever report.
These so-called "scientists" claim they don't KNOW that the VAERS is merely a "LESS THAN 1%" sample of the actual numbers. Apparently, these "experts" are incapable to doing simple math, which REQUIRES that the VAERS numbers be multiplied by at least 100 times before they can even approach accuracy. So when VAERS reports 15K deaths (shortly after jabs) this means 1.5 million people have already been MURDERED by the jabs. And these are ONLY the ones who died almost immediately after the jabs. The vast majority of deaths from the jabs will occur over the next couple of years. These are delayed killing devices. The makers did not INTEND for so many to die so quickly after injection, and are fighting to hide the data.
An Oxford study from 2015 showed that 80% of the deaths after the jabs that ARE reported by VAERS, occurred within HOURS of the jabs. Part of the reason for this, is that the VAERS "reporting rules" block most of the death reports (they block MOST of the "less than 1%" that ever do get reported) even when the symptoms DO appear immediately after injection, but where it takes longer for the victim to actually DIE from their injuries. They will NEVER attribute a death that comes later, to any vaccine, no matter how OBVIOUS it is that the vaccine was the cause.
Oxford's "conclusion" was that there is nothing "concerning" about any of this, because after all, it is VERY common for a 99.74% VACCINE-exposed population to die of these "causes". (By vaccine-exposed, I am speaking of all vaccines.)
Add to this, the fact that the VAERS numbers keep mysteriously dropping - for no apparent reason. Out of the blue, we see the VAERS reported deaths suddenly being "adjusted" from close to 18K back down to 4 or 5K. And then, when a few more THOUSAND deaths stack onto the VEARS numbers, AGAIN they suddenly drop down, deleting thousands of reported deaths without explanation. The closest thing to an excuse for this that I can find, is merely the claim they've "adjusted" these numbers for us, and these are ALWAYS to adjust them DOWN. So it's clearly NOT an attempt to make the numbers more ACCURATE.
When 10 out of 10 times, a checker gives back the WRONG change in their OWN favor, we understand this as THEFT. They know perfectly well HOW to count change back. If it were merely "mistakes" then you'd find at least ONE example where it was in the customer's favor. Sickening.
The is an EXTERMINATION event. All hands are on deck to cover up their crimes while the depopulation agenda marches forward at "warp speed".
My group (The Control Group) is presently suing in Federal Court to obtain a nationwide injunction against all forms of discrimination based upon vaccination status. We are set for oral argument in the 9th Circuit February 8th, 2022. We will NOT stop fighting.
If the Court's final answer is that there is no CIVIL remedy with which to prevent our own extermination,...well....I suppose this will only be for very private discussions amongst the truest of our Patriots. I do so hope our courts will prefer a CIVIL remedy to the alternative. These sham courts can claim the government's extermination of the American people is somehow "Constitutional" until they're blue in the face. There's just no way to convince anyone that any of this is somehow "legal".
Godspeed, and do NOT stop fighting however you still can.
Yep. All fraud. If you change the definition of "unvaccinated" to include people who just got jabbed, you can say the jabbed people are not at a "higher" risk of these "coincidental" HEART ATTACKS (or other effects) that happen shortly after getting jabbed. You can also claim a "pandemic of the unvaccinated". Nice trick. Not fooling anyone who actually LOOKS past the Mainstream propaganda sales-pitch though.
Right. And the first weeks following vaccination leave people more vulnerable to serious infection. No coincidence that these hospitalizations are happening just as the vaccines are rolling out. This study in the UK looked at how this is used to obfuscate vaccine efficacy data since, when you break it down more finely, there is a huge surge in deaths immediately after vaccine rollout--but these deaths get categorized as "unvaccinated" and therefore make the all cause mortality higher in that group. chrome-extension://gphandlahdpffmccakmbngmbjnjiiahp/https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin-Neil-2/publication/356756711_Latest_statistics_on_England_mortality_data_suggest_systematic_mis-categorisation_of_vaccine_status_and_uncertain_effectiveness_of_Covid-19_vaccination/links/61aa3d6750e22929cd4348cb/Latest-statistics-on-England-mortality-data-suggest-systematic-mis-categorisation-of-vaccine-status-and-uncertain-effectiveness-of-Covid-19-vaccination.pdf?origin=publication_detail
When are we going to stop looking for truth in any of these ridiculous tests and vaers reports? They've never told the truth from the beginning, so that should be some indication that it will never happen. Am I looking at this wrong?
Barbara, here is the Harvard study that proved the VAERS reports LESS THAN 1% of the actual injuries and DEATHS shortly after injection- (spread the link around;-) https://digital.ahrq.gov/ahrq-funded-projects/electronic-support-public-health-vaccine-adverse-event-reporting-system
NOTE the opening line on the summation page:
"Adverse events from vaccines are common but underreported, with less than one percent reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)."
Almost every "scientific" paper I see on this subject uses the VAERS numbers to sloppily-prop-up the slogan "rare" (in reference to side-effects). But an ACTUAL examination of the reporting rate came up with an appropriate adjective with which to characterize the frequency of "injuries", (which INCLUDES deaths). The Harvard study proved that these events are "common", at least 100 times more common that the VAERS will ever report.
These so-called "scientists" claim they don't KNOW that the VAERS is merely a "LESS THAN 1%" sample of the actual numbers. Apparently, these "experts" are incapable to doing simple math, which REQUIRES that the VAERS numbers be multiplied by at least 100 times before they can even approach accuracy. So when VAERS reports 15K deaths (shortly after jabs) this means 1.5 million people have already been MURDERED by the jabs. And these are ONLY the ones who died almost immediately after the jabs. The vast majority of deaths from the jabs will occur over the next couple of years. These are delayed killing devices. The makers did not INTEND for so many to die so quickly after injection, and are fighting to hide the data.
An Oxford study from 2015 showed that 80% of the deaths after the jabs that ARE reported by VAERS, occurred within HOURS of the jabs. Part of the reason for this, is that the VAERS "reporting rules" block most of the death reports (they block MOST of the "less than 1%" that ever do get reported) even when the symptoms DO appear immediately after injection, but where it takes longer for the victim to actually DIE from their injuries. They will NEVER attribute a death that comes later, to any vaccine, no matter how OBVIOUS it is that the vaccine was the cause.
Oxford's "conclusion" was that there is nothing "concerning" about any of this, because after all, it is VERY common for a 99.74% VACCINE-exposed population to die of these "causes". (By vaccine-exposed, I am speaking of all vaccines.)
Add to this, the fact that the VAERS numbers keep mysteriously dropping - for no apparent reason. Out of the blue, we see the VAERS reported deaths suddenly being "adjusted" from close to 18K back down to 4 or 5K. And then, when a few more THOUSAND deaths stack onto the VEARS numbers, AGAIN they suddenly drop down, deleting thousands of reported deaths without explanation. The closest thing to an excuse for this that I can find, is merely the claim they've "adjusted" these numbers for us, and these are ALWAYS to adjust them DOWN. So it's clearly NOT an attempt to make the numbers more ACCURATE.
When 10 out of 10 times, a checker gives back the WRONG change in their OWN favor, we understand this as THEFT. They know perfectly well HOW to count change back. If it were merely "mistakes" then you'd find at least ONE example where it was in the customer's favor. Sickening.
The is an EXTERMINATION event. All hands are on deck to cover up their crimes while the depopulation agenda marches forward at "warp speed".
My group (The Control Group) is presently suing in Federal Court to obtain a nationwide injunction against all forms of discrimination based upon vaccination status. We are set for oral argument in the 9th Circuit February 8th, 2022. We will NOT stop fighting.
If the Court's final answer is that there is no CIVIL remedy with which to prevent our own extermination,...well....I suppose this will only be for very private discussions amongst the truest of our Patriots. I do so hope our courts will prefer a CIVIL remedy to the alternative. These sham courts can claim the government's extermination of the American people is somehow "Constitutional" until they're blue in the face. There's just no way to convince anyone that any of this is somehow "legal".
Godspeed, and do NOT stop fighting however you still can.
Joy Garner, founder of The Control Group
https://www.thecontrolgroup.org/
To see our casefiles: https://informedconsentdefense.org/
Yep. All fraud. If you change the definition of "unvaccinated" to include people who just got jabbed, you can say the jabbed people are not at a "higher" risk of these "coincidental" HEART ATTACKS (or other effects) that happen shortly after getting jabbed. You can also claim a "pandemic of the unvaccinated". Nice trick. Not fooling anyone who actually LOOKS past the Mainstream propaganda sales-pitch though.