O/T Covid Vaccine mRNA

[KerrAvon]

What's he on about? Just a question because he can't be right yet he's taken seriously!

https://twitter.com/i/status/1751666966941839431

No idea. I'm not Zuckerberg's keeper.

[KerrAvon]

Kerr,

This is the video I was talking about regarding his spat with Vaucci

https://x.com/bambkb/status/17632179...lcvxGrPcIOixGQ

I've seen it and other variants many times, Frog, and I've explained the context, which, strangely, uss never given.

Maybe I would be more persuasive if I explained the context in a video with a sinister soundtrack and with an American accent and stuck it on Twitter with the rest of the fear p0rn.

[KerrAvon]

My point is that someone else posted the information and I gave the full document.

And what a cracking document it is. Some fantastic articles. You can see how totally rational the author(s) was.

[frogmiller]

And what a cracking document it is. Some fantastic articles. You can see how totally rational the author(s) was.

I didn’t read it. I looked at the link then read lower down and saw the original that I thought may be helpful.

You seem to be upset by something.

You don’t have to participate in this thread.

[crashbang]

You didn't read it.
But posted it regardless?

[KerrAvon]

You should read it. It may give you some clues about the reliability of the author(s).

I'm not upset at all, Frog. I'm just spending a little more time than I wanted to on this thread and so haven't turned my sarcasm down. I will consider myself chastised.

[frogmiller]

You didn't read it.
But posted it regardless?

I posted the actual paper complet and not just the front page

[frogmiller]

You should read it. It may give you some clues about the reliability of the author(s).

I'm not upset at all, Frog. I'm just spending a little more time than I wanted to on this thread and so haven't turned my sarcasm down. I will consider myself chastised.

Don’t. It’s that you’re usually calmer.

[frogmiller]

No one can argue with this fair assessment of public opinion and an easy way to quash folks that have a similar mindset to mine

https://x.com/cartlanddavid/status/1763562732199006434?s=42&t=V3MA7CRmlcvxGrPcIOixGQ

[crashbang]

No one can argue?
Frog you flew over the cuckoos nest.

[frogmiller]

No one can argue?
Frog you flew over the cuckoos nest.

Maybe you should take this nurse and let her come with me.

https://x.com/thekeksociety/status/1763551763301322952?s=42&t=V3MA7CRmlcvxGrPcIOixGQ

[KerrAvon]

No one can argue with this fair assessment of public opinion and an easy way to quash folks that have a similar mindset to mine

https://x.com/cartlanddavid/status/1...lcvxGrPcIOixGQ

I'll happily argue with it, Frog.

Which data sets is he talking about? If it's patient level data then there are likely to be very good data protection reasons why it hasn't been released. I'd also be surprised if it has been released to Pfizer.

It may also be the case that the data set or analysis of the same is incomplete in which case releasing it to the public to be misquoted and taken out of context on Twitter doesn’t seem terribly sensible.

The bottom line is that I’m not sure which data the bloke is talking about and I’m not sure that he does either, otherwise he would have been a bit more specific about exactly what he was asking for.

And of course, there has been a massive data set released to the world by the ONS that shows that all cause mortality in the vaccinated in the UK has been running at lower level than for the un-vaccinated since the spring of 2021. I’m guessing that he wants a data set that says something different.

[KerrAvon]

Maybe you should take this nurse and let her come with me.

https://x.com/thekeksociety/status/1...lcvxGrPcIOixGQ

I’m not sure what this clip has to do with vaccines?

The book that she says has been taken off bookshelves is currently available on Amazon – probably the largest bookshelf in the world. The kindle version is £11.52 and the hardcover is £16.94. There’s also an audio version available.

She also has a very shiny website.

Crucially, the book was published in August 2020 – before the vaccine roll out.

My takeaways from the video were:

1. I agree that politicians don’t make good doctors, which begs the question why the views of the likes of Robert Kenndy Jnr, Senator Ron Johnson, Liz Gunn, Andrew Bridgen and now Philip Davies MP (from the loony wing of the Tory Party) have featured so heavily in this thread.

2. The clip that she played appeared to be a dispute between her and a doctor as to whether attempts should have been made to resuscitate an obviously very ill patient. On the face of, she and the doctor made different clinical decisions. I don’t know who was right - or even if there was an absolute 'right' -and would not be equipped to make that decision even if I heard the full clip as opposed to the bit that one of the ‘sides’ in that disagreement chose to play.

3. I know a bit about the law relating to murder. I don’t think you would see juries convicting many doctors of that offence simply because someone else didn’t agree with their clinical judgment.

4. The suggestion seems to be that financial considerations played a part in clinical decisions. I personally think that the model of health care provision in the US is bonkers (and discriminatory), but I would be very slow to suggest that doctors would make life or death decisions based upon how much they could make out of someone And surely, they could bring more cash in by allowing hopeless patients to limp on , which suggests a logical inconsistency in her views

[frogmiller]

I'll happily argue with it, Frog.

Which data sets is he talking about? If it's patient level data then there are likely to be very good data protection reasons why it hasn't been released. I'd also be surprised if it has been released to Pfizer.

It may also be the case that the data set or analysis of the same is incomplete in which case releasing it to the public to be misquoted and taken out of context on Twitter doesn’t seem terribly sensible.

The bottom line is that I’m not sure which data the bloke is talking about and I’m not sure that he does either, otherwise he would have been a bit more specific about exactly what he was asking for.

And of course, there has been a massive data set released to the world by the ONS that shows that all cause mortality in the vaccinated in the UK has been running at lower level than for the un-vaccinated since the spring of 2021. I’m guessing that he wants a data set that says something different.

So basically don’t know what data he’s talking about and he’s talking about the abuse that the ONS has come into from folks like me.

He’s asking for the information to be released that has been given to the phama companies and you argue with it.

Would that be one of the best ways of satisfying the masses?

Let us find out the reason it’s been withheld.

Several requests have been placed for this information and its fuelling the conspiracy.

[KerrAvon]

I have no idea what he is talking about. I don't think he does. My suspicion is that he is simply parroting Bridgen. The clue for that is where he talks about ‘young and previously healthy people are dying at home from cardiac-related events, and we do not know why’ without establishing whether that is actually the case over and above the way it has always happened.
.
I have no idea what data has been realised to Pfizer. Do you?

Davies was talking about the MHRA as opposed to ONS. I don’t know if he’s been made aware of the ONS data that shows lower all-cause mortality in the vaccinated – it doesn’t get trumpeted very much on Twitter. Too inconvenient, I imagine.

With the greatest of respect, are you qualified to criticise or abuse the ONS for the manner in which they refined the excess death data? Do you think adjusting it to account for an ageing population is the wrong approach? On what basis?

Would it satisfy you if the MHRA did a massive date dump on the internet - a spreadsheet with hundreds of thousand of pages, or would you wait for analysis by the likes of Bridgen, Dr Campbell or 'Died Suddenly' to 'inform' you about what it shows?

The MHRA is a public body. It is subject to the Freedom of Information Act, so make a request if you want the documents. You will have to be a bit more specific than the ‘certain data sets’ that Davies referred to.

MPs are as capable of talking crap as you or I. Indeed, some might think that many of them have made a career out of it