Certainly disturbing, but the details seem wobbly? If 3.7% of the cases Pfizer "looked at for adverse events" resulted in deaths, then we need to know how many cases they looked at to determine an overall death rate. And also know what proportion of vaccinees were looked at. The figure of 4 million seems to apply the 3.7% rate to the 100 million injections - NOT to the cases of those 100 million that were looked at - so its doesn't make sense to extrapolate like that. Apart from not knowing what's actually happening, this seems to run a risk of being ignored for faulty reasoning. Exaggerating risks is no more helpful strategically than exaggerating safety and effectiveness claims, I think - ultimately unwise.
Vax injury fatality rate is sort of like sars2 infection fatality rate. We should be interested in what makes some get sick while most don't, and why do some of the sick die, while most don't. Infection fatality rate is much lower than vax injury fatality rate, so it seems forgoing the vax is the smart move. Infection fatalities go way up in presence of co morbidities, and eventually we'll see research that explains why some get injured by the vax, and some of those die, while most don't, or at least haven't reported injuries. We don't yet know how to diagnose those injuries without acute symptoms. Probably many more have unreported injuries, which will eventually raise the denominator in Naomi's stats, lowering the apparent injury rate and the injury fatality rate. Just like co morbidities increase the risk of sickness and death from the virus, we'll probably find there are co morbidities that affect vax outcomes. The second worst crime inflicted by the medical bureaucracy has been the prohibition of research and even discussion of these crucial factors. The worst crime was prohibition of early treatment, which would have eliminated most of the infection fatalities and eliminated the need for experimental vax and meds. These crimes will be prosecuted, eventually, or our society will fail.
So all this information keeps coming out why is it still being pushed in humanity. Nothing is being done to these murders. Judgement day can’t come soon enough.
It really goes back to the PREP Act which doesn't end until Oct 1st 2024. Until that date, it's open season on humans since there is no liability on deaths in the hospitals and long term care facilities.
Yes. It's not a 3.7% death rate, it's that 3.7% of recorded events were deaths.
We have no idea how many people were injected, so we don't know the denominator.
We also have no idea how honest the processes were that would collect this information. And we have no idea if the injections were the same as those forced on everyone else. Independent VAERS analysis indicates that the content of the injections actually administered greatly varies.
But in the above you still say there will have been 4 m deaths out of 100m recipients, which, bad as these are, is just not possible (being more than the total number of background deaths occurring) and also the wrong conclusion from the safety surveillance report.
Don’t get me wrong, that document contains some astonishingly bad stuff, but this kind of reporting detracts from those of us commenting more judiciously on it.
Certainly disturbing, but the details seem wobbly? If 3.7% of the cases Pfizer "looked at for adverse events" resulted in deaths, then we need to know how many cases they looked at to determine an overall death rate. And also know what proportion of vaccinees were looked at. The figure of 4 million seems to apply the 3.7% rate to the 100 million injections - NOT to the cases of those 100 million that were looked at - so its doesn't make sense to extrapolate like that. Apart from not knowing what's actually happening, this seems to run a risk of being ignored for faulty reasoning. Exaggerating risks is no more helpful strategically than exaggerating safety and effectiveness claims, I think - ultimately unwise.
At least!
Vax injury fatality rate is sort of like sars2 infection fatality rate. We should be interested in what makes some get sick while most don't, and why do some of the sick die, while most don't. Infection fatality rate is much lower than vax injury fatality rate, so it seems forgoing the vax is the smart move. Infection fatalities go way up in presence of co morbidities, and eventually we'll see research that explains why some get injured by the vax, and some of those die, while most don't, or at least haven't reported injuries. We don't yet know how to diagnose those injuries without acute symptoms. Probably many more have unreported injuries, which will eventually raise the denominator in Naomi's stats, lowering the apparent injury rate and the injury fatality rate. Just like co morbidities increase the risk of sickness and death from the virus, we'll probably find there are co morbidities that affect vax outcomes. The second worst crime inflicted by the medical bureaucracy has been the prohibition of research and even discussion of these crucial factors. The worst crime was prohibition of early treatment, which would have eliminated most of the infection fatalities and eliminated the need for experimental vax and meds. These crimes will be prosecuted, eventually, or our society will fail.
So all this information keeps coming out why is it still being pushed in humanity. Nothing is being done to these murders. Judgement day can’t come soon enough.
It will begin in January, with the new congress.
Sure hope so.
Hope is not an effective strategy, but its a good start.
That's extremely important piece of information! Thank You!
Remember when 56 people died after a flu shot. It was pulled…..
Here’s my question: how long can they keep this up, I.e. pushing these “vaxes”?
They keep it up only as long as we allow it.
It really goes back to the PREP Act which doesn't end until Oct 1st 2024. Until that date, it's open season on humans since there is no liability on deaths in the hospitals and long term care facilities.
I thought the number of doses administered had been redacted, and we knew the number of doses shipped?
Yes. It's not a 3.7% death rate, it's that 3.7% of recorded events were deaths.
We have no idea how many people were injected, so we don't know the denominator.
We also have no idea how honest the processes were that would collect this information. And we have no idea if the injections were the same as those forced on everyone else. Independent VAERS analysis indicates that the content of the injections actually administered greatly varies.
I made a correction in the title
But in the above you still say there will have been 4 m deaths out of 100m recipients, which, bad as these are, is just not possible (being more than the total number of background deaths occurring) and also the wrong conclusion from the safety surveillance report.
Don’t get me wrong, that document contains some astonishingly bad stuff, but this kind of reporting detracts from those of us commenting more judiciously on it.
I know