We'd like to talk to her about the safety and efficacy of vaccines, masks, and early treatments, but it seems like she does not want to be questioned live on anything she says. I wonder why?
I've read the remarks below Steve and cannot add to them. I reckon she's been paid by Big pharma to follow the narrative. She probably doesn't give a toss about parents kids, she's only here to make the money. That's why you have to pay to ask her questions. As my late mom used to say, don't judge a book by it's cover. The smiling face is not what it appears to be. She's been bought.
I don’t think she really has a thorough understanding of the current situation/data. She just parrots what ‘official’ sources disseminate. I would suggest it isn’t worth your time to debate her.
I can’t stand her substack . Does she get paid by big pharma ? I can’t believe the comments of parents , some anxiously awaiting their young healthy child to get a jab they don’t need and willing to even lie about the age to get it. Sick covid cult
Steve I am wondering if there is data to support that vaccinated actually have a greater chance of getting COVID and/or actually having a worse symptomatic response? It seems that in the last two weeks I’ve heard of a lot of COVID cases and all of them are in the triple vaxxed friend group—but my unvaccinated acquaintances thus far have not been getting the virus and/or show lesser symptoms than their vaxxed partners…. Thank you!
The UK data that Igor Chudov analyzed demonstrated that by week 45 almost all groups were showing negative efficacy, thus making them much more likely to get covid. I looked at the original data as well as his tables and was able to reproduce his calculations, so I am fairly sure his assessment was correct. The data on deaths is also provided. Of course if you read the UKHSA report in full it is the usual vaccines are 'safe and effective' narrative but they do provide the data - they just conveniently do not do this calculation.
Dec 18, 2021·edited Dec 18, 2021Liked by Steve Kirsch
Two possibilities, and this is true of all academics and authorities that peddle the same narrative. One is that she (they) is (are) aware of all she does not know and doesn't want to be called out. The other is that she is so certain that she is right that anyone who challenges her position must be misinformed or brainwashed; she is therefore unwilling to waste her precious time and energy engaging. The former is indicative of a much greater understanding of the science. One year ago I would have guessed that that were the case. These days I would bet on the latter. Folks like her have doubled down so many times that they have forgotten about the assumptions, inherent error and shortcomings of the methodology behind the studies that support their foundational opinions. To make matters worse they are surrounded by group think that not only reflects their scientific position but also validates their idea that all who disagree must be completely out to lunch.
Her page is literally the bane of my existence (and why I started mine on fb, which is thoroughly shadowbanned). I've had so many people say "well, you're an epidemiologist, but this other page says this other scary thing, so I'm going to listen to her". Even though everything I post on my page is thoroughly cited with actual data, literature, and occasionally a really cool substack like this one, or Aaron Kheriaty, or maybe some epidemiologists on twitter.
Have you taken a look at her CV? This is not her area of expertise and some of her writings also make it clear she has little understanding of the subject.
Dec 18, 2021·edited Dec 19, 2021Liked by Steve Kirsch
I picked one post at random and the comments broke my heart. A whole bunch of women clamoring to get their infants and toddlers jabbed. I can't even....
May I suggest if you want to comment on YLE, you pose as a "big fan" of her work and suggest it is important to expose misinformation purveyors such as Kirsch and his groupies. Why not challenge him and his team to a debate and expose their misinformation??? Otherwise, you'll get attacked by her minions.
Great idea Steve in theory but even if she did, only her cult have the truth, maybe she is not ready to be set free, but everything changes if someone or herself becomes a victim of the vaccine shot that is the stark reality.
“The antibody response after boosting is fundamentally different than it was before. It's not just raising the level of the existing antibodies, it's doing a lot more than that. Calling the third shot a booster is oversimplifying.”
This was a vague part of her last post from a “study” from a “lab”. I could not access.
BBC has a similar story which it calls sending your immune system to school! "Fighting coronavirus is something your immune system has to learn.
One option is to figure it out on the job when you encounter the virus for real. However, there is a risk of getting it wrong and ending up seriously ill.
Vaccines are more like a school - a safer environment to further your immune system's Covid education.
The first dose is the primary school education that nails the fundamentals.
Your second and third doses are comparable to sending your immune system to secondary school and then university to dramatically deepen its understanding. It's not just repeating primary school over and over.
"The immune system is left with a richer knowledge and understanding of the virus," said Prof Jonathan Ball, a virologist from the University of Nottingham."
Yeah, that was puzzling to me. The plots (which are posted with very little context) appeared to show that boosting produced reaction to Omicron that was not previously present. One thing I wondered was whether they took a sample just prior to boosting, or they were relying on a long previous sample as the prior. Because one possible explanation for that data is that the subjects had been exposed to Omicron without knowing it, and developed additional AB coverage. It's just hard to figure out why the ABs produced would be substantially different on the third injection. Higher titers makes sense, but a different population?
I just paid $50 to be able to comment but need some time to ask.
The questions on her posts make me sad. “Do fully vaccinated adults need to wear masks and distance outdoors if it’s so transmissible?” Just fucking sad.
One piece of cognitive dissonance that seems prevalent there is the dual idea that everyone must vaccinate to protect others, while at the same time they obviously don't prevent transmission or infection. "There are still 75 million Americans relying on the 'herd' to protect them through no choice of their own". First off I have no idea where 75 million came from. But it seems like on the one hand they are trying to jab toddlers to save the world, and everyone must do their part to be vaxxed to save others, while at the same time acknowledging that Omicron blows right through vaccination (and while they seem to think boosting is a good solution to that, real world evidence seems to disagree).
I don't know if even juxtaposing these dissonant elements can break through to them, I suspect they will just ignore it.
There is a willful effort to latch on to any bad news however implausible. For example there was a discussion of a claim that 30-70% of covid recovered have long covid. I know the studies that claimed that and they are of course complete garbage. The incidence of claims of long covid was shown to be uncorrelated with having actually had covid! 30%?? 70%?? That's nuts: half the country has recovered from covid!
There is a willful avoidance of any potential solutions to their problems that may actually work, and especially ones that do not rely on collective action, for example the many protocols that have shown success in treating long covid, early treatment protocols, etc.
This is partly because the "authorities" have suppressed and marginalized the voices producing solutions. But there is a larger problem: they don't want a way out. Covid has become a source of meaning in life to them.
They don't want any solution that is individual vs collective. Through the requirement of collective action they create more meaning and purpose for themselves - I must do this sacrificial ritual to help others - and empowering an individual to save themselves destroys their purpose in being part of the collective. Having a working solution likewise could make the sacrifices unnecessary. Government being the solution is a form of the collective. In group / out group conflict solidifies their in group membership and creates costs for joining the out group.
This is the "mass formation" that many people have brought up (Matthias Desmet in particular, has been interviewed by Chris Martenson and others, Robert Malone has brought this up also).
All of this ritual sacrifice (jabbing the kids - especially if it kills them!, wearing masks, canceling travel plans, etc) further cements their need for covid to continue forever so they can continue to sacrifice for others.
We need strategy to skillfully interact.with her supporters.we must focus on how we can manage virus practically and why freedom is important...we needs great minds coming forward in this group..like yesterday
that's a really great idea actually. If you generate a Meet URL or equivalent, and a time email to me and I'll post it and get a crowd for you. stevekirsch@substack.com
I will be pleasantly astonished if you succeed in securing an honest debate with the vaccine orthodoxy, much less change their minds. Too many careers and too much money are at stake. My humble suggestion is that they must be disrupted Silicon Valley style.
San Jose, CA. The land of genius high tech entrepreneurs who make stodgy companies disappear with disruptive new products/services. Often referred to as Silicon Valley because of the large semiconductor industry presence (Intel, AMD, Nvidia, Lattice, etc.) where they use a lot of the chemical element of atomic number 14 (silicon).
I've read the remarks below Steve and cannot add to them. I reckon she's been paid by Big pharma to follow the narrative. She probably doesn't give a toss about parents kids, she's only here to make the money. That's why you have to pay to ask her questions. As my late mom used to say, don't judge a book by it's cover. The smiling face is not what it appears to be. She's been bought.
I don’t think she really has a thorough understanding of the current situation/data. She just parrots what ‘official’ sources disseminate. I would suggest it isn’t worth your time to debate her.
Her latest post is really indicative:
https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/why-did-the-pfizer-young-kids-trial
I can’t stand her substack . Does she get paid by big pharma ? I can’t believe the comments of parents , some anxiously awaiting their young healthy child to get a jab they don’t need and willing to even lie about the age to get it. Sick covid cult
Steve I am wondering if there is data to support that vaccinated actually have a greater chance of getting COVID and/or actually having a worse symptomatic response? It seems that in the last two weeks I’ve heard of a lot of COVID cases and all of them are in the triple vaxxed friend group—but my unvaccinated acquaintances thus far have not been getting the virus and/or show lesser symptoms than their vaxxed partners…. Thank you!
you are not alone
The UK data that Igor Chudov analyzed demonstrated that by week 45 almost all groups were showing negative efficacy, thus making them much more likely to get covid. I looked at the original data as well as his tables and was able to reproduce his calculations, so I am fairly sure his assessment was correct. The data on deaths is also provided. Of course if you read the UKHSA report in full it is the usual vaccines are 'safe and effective' narrative but they do provide the data - they just conveniently do not do this calculation.
Two possibilities, and this is true of all academics and authorities that peddle the same narrative. One is that she (they) is (are) aware of all she does not know and doesn't want to be called out. The other is that she is so certain that she is right that anyone who challenges her position must be misinformed or brainwashed; she is therefore unwilling to waste her precious time and energy engaging. The former is indicative of a much greater understanding of the science. One year ago I would have guessed that that were the case. These days I would bet on the latter. Folks like her have doubled down so many times that they have forgotten about the assumptions, inherent error and shortcomings of the methodology behind the studies that support their foundational opinions. To make matters worse they are surrounded by group think that not only reflects their scientific position but also validates their idea that all who disagree must be completely out to lunch.
Keep at it Steve. Great work you are doing.
An excellent summary of the science that shows masks don't work: https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/
Her page is literally the bane of my existence (and why I started mine on fb, which is thoroughly shadowbanned). I've had so many people say "well, you're an epidemiologist, but this other page says this other scary thing, so I'm going to listen to her". Even though everything I post on my page is thoroughly cited with actual data, literature, and occasionally a really cool substack like this one, or Aaron Kheriaty, or maybe some epidemiologists on twitter.
Have you taken a look at her CV? This is not her area of expertise and some of her writings also make it clear she has little understanding of the subject.
proof once again that facts don't matter.
I picked one post at random and the comments broke my heart. A whole bunch of women clamoring to get their infants and toddlers jabbed. I can't even....
Smart move by her, putting the ability to comment behind a paywall. This way she keeps her comment section "clean" and even makes $ doing it...
I wanted to comment but I’m not willing to support her substack to do it
May I suggest if you want to comment on YLE, you pose as a "big fan" of her work and suggest it is important to expose misinformation purveyors such as Kirsch and his groupies. Why not challenge him and his team to a debate and expose their misinformation??? Otherwise, you'll get attacked by her minions.
Great idea Steve in theory but even if she did, only her cult have the truth, maybe she is not ready to be set free, but everything changes if someone or herself becomes a victim of the vaccine shot that is the stark reality.
Need to pay to comment ... won't do that so won't be able to bombard her with facts like Eric
“The antibody response after boosting is fundamentally different than it was before. It's not just raising the level of the existing antibodies, it's doing a lot more than that. Calling the third shot a booster is oversimplifying.”
This was a vague part of her last post from a “study” from a “lab”. I could not access.
This sounds like some serious horseshit.
BBC has a similar story which it calls sending your immune system to school! "Fighting coronavirus is something your immune system has to learn.
One option is to figure it out on the job when you encounter the virus for real. However, there is a risk of getting it wrong and ending up seriously ill.
Vaccines are more like a school - a safer environment to further your immune system's Covid education.
The first dose is the primary school education that nails the fundamentals.
Your second and third doses are comparable to sending your immune system to secondary school and then university to dramatically deepen its understanding. It's not just repeating primary school over and over.
"The immune system is left with a richer knowledge and understanding of the virus," said Prof Jonathan Ball, a virologist from the University of Nottingham."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59639973
I am not a virologist but I can smell horseshit.
Yeah, that was puzzling to me. The plots (which are posted with very little context) appeared to show that boosting produced reaction to Omicron that was not previously present. One thing I wondered was whether they took a sample just prior to boosting, or they were relying on a long previous sample as the prior. Because one possible explanation for that data is that the subjects had been exposed to Omicron without knowing it, and developed additional AB coverage. It's just hard to figure out why the ABs produced would be substantially different on the third injection. Higher titers makes sense, but a different population?
Honestly I don’t know what data we can trust anymore.
I just paid $50 to be able to comment but need some time to ask.
The questions on her posts make me sad. “Do fully vaccinated adults need to wear masks and distance outdoors if it’s so transmissible?” Just fucking sad.
One piece of cognitive dissonance that seems prevalent there is the dual idea that everyone must vaccinate to protect others, while at the same time they obviously don't prevent transmission or infection. "There are still 75 million Americans relying on the 'herd' to protect them through no choice of their own". First off I have no idea where 75 million came from. But it seems like on the one hand they are trying to jab toddlers to save the world, and everyone must do their part to be vaxxed to save others, while at the same time acknowledging that Omicron blows right through vaccination (and while they seem to think boosting is a good solution to that, real world evidence seems to disagree).
I don't know if even juxtaposing these dissonant elements can break through to them, I suspect they will just ignore it.
There is a willful effort to latch on to any bad news however implausible. For example there was a discussion of a claim that 30-70% of covid recovered have long covid. I know the studies that claimed that and they are of course complete garbage. The incidence of claims of long covid was shown to be uncorrelated with having actually had covid! 30%?? 70%?? That's nuts: half the country has recovered from covid!
There is a willful avoidance of any potential solutions to their problems that may actually work, and especially ones that do not rely on collective action, for example the many protocols that have shown success in treating long covid, early treatment protocols, etc.
This is partly because the "authorities" have suppressed and marginalized the voices producing solutions. But there is a larger problem: they don't want a way out. Covid has become a source of meaning in life to them.
They don't want any solution that is individual vs collective. Through the requirement of collective action they create more meaning and purpose for themselves - I must do this sacrificial ritual to help others - and empowering an individual to save themselves destroys their purpose in being part of the collective. Having a working solution likewise could make the sacrifices unnecessary. Government being the solution is a form of the collective. In group / out group conflict solidifies their in group membership and creates costs for joining the out group.
This is the "mass formation" that many people have brought up (Matthias Desmet in particular, has been interviewed by Chris Martenson and others, Robert Malone has brought this up also).
https://odysee.com/@johnnydhollywoodmedia:9/WHY-DO-SO-MANY-STILL-BUY-INTO-THE-NARRATIVE-:5
All of this ritual sacrifice (jabbing the kids - especially if it kills them!, wearing masks, canceling travel plans, etc) further cements their need for covid to continue forever so they can continue to sacrifice for others.
The recommendations for addressing this are
* speak the truth
* ridicule with subtlety
* form parallel structures
Ugh. Why did you spend $50?!?! you can subscribe monthly and then cancel!!! For sure, make sure to keep asking her why she won't debate me.
Haha. Whatever. Business is good. I thought it might give me a little extra cred to get things answered! 🤣
He bought the year-long heckler package. (Can she kick him out again?)
Steve - I took a look through her CV. She won't debate your team because she can't. She wouldn't last 5 minutes in a real debate on this topic.
She feels like a student. Everything she says has this “I cleared this with the authorities” feel and she doesn’t ask hard questions of the data.
I couldn't bring myself to do that ... feel free to drop this https://pdfhost.io/v/pZig3jgly_VAERS_Heart_Damage_V2
We need strategy to skillfully interact.with her supporters.we must focus on how we can manage virus practically and why freedom is important...we needs great minds coming forward in this group..like yesterday
..
that's a really great idea actually. If you generate a Meet URL or equivalent, and a time email to me and I'll post it and get a crowd for you. stevekirsch@substack.com
None of the corrupt bloggers pushing the mandate want to discuss the science. They get paid for pushing the Big Lie.
I will be pleasantly astonished if you succeed in securing an honest debate with the vaccine orthodoxy, much less change their minds. Too many careers and too much money are at stake. My humble suggestion is that they must be disrupted Silicon Valley style.
which is... ?
Silicon?
San Jose, CA. The land of genius high tech entrepreneurs who make stodgy companies disappear with disruptive new products/services. Often referred to as Silicon Valley because of the large semiconductor industry presence (Intel, AMD, Nvidia, Lattice, etc.) where they use a lot of the chemical element of atomic number 14 (silicon).