The CDC is now blocking my emails. And they were lying about myocarditis.
I'm going to need your help to let them know about the billboards we bought since they are now blocking all my emails.
Help me email the CDC
They are now blocking all my emails. If you’d like to help me reach the CDC, please take a minute and fill out this volunteer form. Be sure to check the box in the computer skills section:
Once a month, a coordinator will send you the email and a random number of CDC email addresses. So it’s a minute of your time or less, maybe once a month.
The myocarditis survey results
I only have 22 responses on my myocarditis survey so far. If you haven’t filled it out, please do!
The results are here.
Key conclusions:
You can see that for everyone who took the survey, the rate of myocarditis skyrocketed after the vaccines rolled out, contrary to what the medical community believes.
The rate per month increased by more than a factor of 10 on average. This is what the CDC means by a “slight increase.” Good thing it wasn’t a major increase!!!
My responders are collectively seeing 135 cases of myocarditis in people under age 25 per month since the vaccines rolled out for young people.
So let’s be super conservative and say that these healthcare workers are the ONLY ones in the ENTIRE US seeing these rare events. So 135/month * 12 months = 1,620 cases per year for people under 25.
This is amazing because this is more than all the known cases in just my first 20 healthcare workers to respond!!!
Now, I’m pretty sure that there are more than 20 of my readers that are seeing these cases. And my reach is less than 1% of all healthcare workers.
So this gives a conservative extrapolation of well over 100,000 cases of myocarditis / pericarditis for people under age 25.
This is not what the CDC thinks. From this article from NBC News:
Of the hundreds of millions of Covid vaccine doses given in the U.S. since late 2020, there have been around 1,000 reports of vaccine-related myocarditis or pericarditis in children under age 18, primarily young males, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
And then of course are the propaganda articles like this one from GAVI claiming that the benefits > risks. Well the risks are around 1 in a million of dying from COVID. How do they know that the vaccine is killing fewer than 1 in 10 million kids they vaccinate? Well, they don’t.
The GAVI article says:
The CDC researchers estimated there might be a maximum of 70 cases of myocarditis out of a million second doses given to boys ages 12 to 17, but that the vaccine would prevent 5,700 infections, 215 hospitalisations and two deaths.
Well, it looks like 100,000 cases and let’s say all kids are vaccinated. So that’s 5,000 cases of myocarditis per million. So it’s not 70… they are off by close to a factor of 100.
It is a no brainer not to vaccinate kids. There is no safety study showing that the vaccine kills fewer than 1 person per million doses. The benefits cannot outweigh the risks. There is no data on this.
But there is data suggesting the CDC is wildly inaccurate about the myocarditis rates.
If the CDC has a more definitive survey of healthcare workers, I’d love to see it.
Hopefully, with your help (per the previous section), we’ll be able to ask them that question.
Summary
The CDC doesn’t like being held accountable. They are blocking my emails and refusing to do surveys that would clearly reveal that they’ve been lying to people about the myocarditis rates. The survey took me all of 5 minutes to put together and send out. Why is the CDC incapable of doing such a survey?
Please fill out my volunteer form so I can bypass their block.
CVS is sending my DAUGHTER e-mails about participating in an mRNA flu vaccine trial. I’m livid! That company is evil personified.
It was interesting following the link to GAVI.
As a professional writer, I do a lot of advocacy, informational, and promotional pieces for clients. The GAVI articles - including older ones on masking - have all the hallmarks of messaging trying to (unsuccessfully) compensate for extremely weak basis in fact. They are embarrassingly light on hard data and rely on an appeal to authority or experts while simultaneously quoting only a single expert - or none. Reading closer, the “evidence” is models. They have no sources to cite. It’s actually laughable at how weak their material is.
Here’s a little test: imagine you are a writer hired by GAVI and your assignment is to generate a piece titled “Making the Case for _____________” where the blank becomes masking, lockdowns, vaccine efficacy, vaccine safety, etc. Now, read a few GAVI articles and ask yourself whether anything they contain could be considered compelling and capable of turning a skeptic into a believer. Ask further if a reader that approached the topic at hand with a neutral point of view and no prior knowledge would find the evidence overwhelming or merely “meh”.
As a writer, this strongly suggests they had very little to work with. Indeed, if you consider that this reflected the very best they could serve up, just how pathetic was everything else they might have had in the kitchen?
We live in a time where, unfortunately, it is more important than ever to spot propaganda. The best propaganda is when those subjected to it will vigorously insist that they aren't being manipulated and will insist that all other points of view are not just misguided - they are hateful and harmful. To paraphrase Nazi Hermann Göring, "It's very easy to manipulate people - you simply must convince them they are in danger and they will then gladly comply" (where "comply" = "surrender their freedoms).