O/T Covid Vaccine mRNA

[frogmiller]

Don't reply then to frogs nonsense. Even cam has isolated from it.

Just because I have a different view on things it doesn’t mean that it’s nonsense. You just don’t agre with it.

[crashbang]

WEF represented by Schwab were at the G20 meeting in Bali in 2022, not at the 2023 in New Delhi or the 2021 meeting in Rome.

WEF, Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations, Chatham House are more than just "talking shops", they're where policies are decided on before they "filter through" to governments. Ultimately they decide on the future direction of the planet.

Yes of course they do .

[frogmiller]

Yes of course they do .

Fûck me Crash you’re really 100% behind what’s been fed to you through the media

[crashbang]

Frog WEF are numpties.if you don't believe that I have no hope for you.

[frogmiller]

Frog WEF are numpties.if you don't believe that I have no hope for you.

It doesn’t matter what I think but Kier said that he’d prefer Cavos to Westminster

I’ll not criticise anyone that changes their opinion

[crashbang]

It doesn’t matter what I think but Kier said that he’d prefer Cavos to Westminster

I’ll not criticise anyone that changes their opinion

That's me done.kier FFS
Night.

[frogmiller]

That's me done.kier FFS
Night.

Even ou must have seen it on the BBC

[Eternal Optimist]

That's me done.kier FFS
Night.

Shame. This is one of the best threads on here for ages, and you've certainly played your part.

[frogmiller]

https://x.com/raymond82310289/status/1738716749321658585?s=42&t=V3MA7CRmlcvxGrPcIOixGQ

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

Just watching the carol recital from Kings College Cambridge on the tv

There’s a member of the public singing in the choir wearing a surgical “ covid” mask ��

[Ericsladkilnhurst]

Still see people wearing masks when shopping in supermarkets.

[KerrAvon]

Why should it be a matter for comment? It's their choice.

Perhaps they are clinically vulnerable or live with someone who is.

[frogmiller]

I’m sorry to hear of your troubles, Frog.

I can empathise with anyone who suffers from a vaccine side-effect. In 1997, I developed Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) shortly after receiving a Hepatitis B vaccination that I needed for my work at that time. I was hospitalised for three weeks and was effectively paralysed for several days, which wasn’t a fun experience. I received treatement until 2003.

It’s impossible to conclusively prove the cause of GBS, but it is an acknowledged vaccine side effect.

Despite my experiences, I continue to have vaccinations when recommended to do so. This year has been a bumper year with tetanus and typhoid boosters and two rounds of MMR for travel purposes. In October, I had my fifth covid jab (all Pfizer). I won't hestiate to have any further Covid vaccinations that I am offered.

The reason that I choose to be vaccinated is because whatever I do for a living now, I am scientist by training and inclination (my first degree include courses in biochemistry, physiology and microbiology, amongst others). I still follow developments in biological sciences and have watched the science surrounding covid and vaccinations with interest. I have also followed the antics of the anti-vax movement that has had such a field day with the pandemic.

I urge anyone with concerns about the covid jabs to ask themselves where they are getting their information from. If it is from the likes of Twitter (X if you must) and Facebook then I would further urge you to reflect upon that. Those platforms are not your friend; they are interested in page views and their algorithms show you material that they think you will be interested in as opposed to a balanced view based on peer-reviewed and reliable science. They create a little echo chamber in which you only see and hear material from the side of the argument that the algorithms believe you to favour. In other words, if you watch and read cobblers, you will be shown more and more cobblers.

Peer reviewed science is not published on X and Facebook; it is published in the likes of The Lancet, The New England Journal of Medicine and the British Medical Journal. I appreciate those journals are not for everyone (me included most of the time), but it’s possible to find more user-friendly analysis such as the lady in the link below. Yes, her voice is undoubtedly annoying, but she tells you where to find the actual science that she is relying upon. The same can’t be said of X:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Qqs2yqo1mU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4avgtbCLJWA

I've taken on board what you've said and it's worrying regarding the Lancet

Estimating excess mortality due to the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic analysis of COVID-19-related mortality, 2020–21

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02796-3/fulltext

The sponsor:-
Funding
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, J Stanton, T Gillespie, and J and E Nordstrom


Excess mortality in England post COVID-19 pandemic: implications for secondary prevention

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(23)00221-1/fulltext

Declaration of interests
JP-S is Partner at Lane Clark & Peacock LLP, Chair of the Royal Society for Public Health and reports personal fees from Novo Nordisk and Pfizer Ltd outside of this submitted work. SM is Partner at Lane Clark & Peacock LLP and deputy Chair of the Continuous Mortality Investigation. All other authors declare no competing interests.

[ragingpup]

I've taken on board what you've said and it's worrying regarding the Lancet

Estimating excess mortality due to the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic analysis of COVID-19-related mortality, 2020–21

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02796-3/fulltext

The sponsor:-
Funding
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, J Stanton, T Gillespie, and J and E Nordstrom


Excess mortality in England post COVID-19 pandemic: implications for secondary prevention

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(23)00221-1/fulltext

Declaration of interests
JP-S is Partner at Lane Clark & Peacock LLP, Chair of the Royal Society for Public Health and reports personal fees from Novo Nordisk and Pfizer Ltd outside of this submitted work. SM is Partner at Lane Clark & Peacock LLP and deputy Chair of the Continuous Mortality Investigation. All other authors declare no competing interests.

I would say that in light of the competing interests you've identified, it always if fair to read such articles with a highly critical eye. But having skimmed the huge first article and read the 2nd, what are your specific issues with the conclusions of the 2nd report? Do you have dispute with it's specific findings, or just the general fact that a contributer also had a conflicting interest? (from my very limited knowledge of health journals, I don't think this is unusual, and you would certainly expect their peers to be quite vigilent in looking at their contributions with this fact in mind.

[frogmiller]

I would say that in light of the competing interests you've identified, it always if fair to read such articles with a highly critical eye. But having skimmed the huge first article and read the 2nd, what are your specific issues with the conclusions of the 2nd report? Do you have dispute with it's specific findings, or just the general fact that a contributer also had a conflicting interest? (from my very limited knowledge of health journals, I don't think this is unusual, and you would certainly expect their peers to be quite vigilent in looking at their contributions with this fact in mind.

My issue has always been the mNRA part of the vaccine. The conflict of interest concerns me greatly. In both reports Pfizer and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have both proffited in the Billions in the production of the vaccines. Should the conflict of interest make these reports valid? The Google links point directly at the WHO that is massively funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation puts that in direct conflict with the reports..

And I've yet to see a stude about the effect that the vaccine has had on any of these figures.

It concerns me that the people, the governments, the authorities that we grew up believing were doing good have been influenced from the outside. By un-elected wealthy elites that are making Billions of dollars, pounds or whatever currency out of this on going situation.

Is this just a money making scheme or is it much more synister? Have the elites like Bill Gates and the WEF really got into a position where they can reduce the worlds population as they've been openly saying?

These are questions. And I wouldn't have believed them and dismissed out of hand as a conspiricy when I walked freely into the clinic for my jabs! I won't do it again because of the doubts around what these people have been openly saying. Unfortunately the main stream media is owned by them so there is a restriction on whatever they say or mainly don't say.