I have read so many papers during the scamdemic whose results say one thing but their title and abstract say another. I don't recall ever running into this diabolic phenomena until covid 19. The first time I noticed it was the much cited paper saying "vaccines are safe for pregnant women". But if you read the actual data within it is chi…
I have read so many papers during the scamdemic whose results say one thing but their title and abstract say another. I don't recall ever running into this diabolic phenomena until covid 19. The first time I noticed it was the much cited paper saying "vaccines are safe for pregnant women". But if you read the actual data within it is chilling and no pregnant person should come anywhere near one of these injections. As a 67-year-old woman who got myo- pericarditis Within 24 hours of her first Moderna Feb 2021. I'm glad to see they are mentioning females. There have actually been several papers showing that females are more susceptible but the narrative remains that it is primarily young males. I Personally suspect it is every age and sex but that's an inconvenient truth. It's more noticeable in young active people Who until now rarely had heart issues. By the time you hit your 60s The medical community blows you off because you might already have other problems. I actually had no other health problems and only go to the Doctor once a year for the mandatory and ridiculous medicare visit. So 4 weeks of chest pain, Left arm and shoulder pain and breathlessness and extreme fatigue ( fatigue and breathlessness lasted 3 months), was alarming. My GP and my cardiologist both insisted "it could not possibly be related to the safe and effective vaccine that I had just had". VAERS Initially deleted my report. When I realized it several months later, I pointed it out to an actual person at Vaers and they acted embarrassed and reinstated it immediately. In those naive early days I honestly thought Vaers would call me for more details because of this alarming result. But no one ever called of course. It was easier to simply delete the report. How many other reports did they delete because they didn't fit the narrative?
That was the beginning of the end of my faith in the medical community. Well actually I've been a skeptic for a number of years, but I generally thought the 3 letter agencies and doctors had our best interest in mind. Now I sadly know better. At this point I realized we were each on our own to figure this thing out. Are any of these doctors reading these papers or listening to their patients?Or does the band simply keep playing on the tune of "safe and effective"?
VAERS is a decent idea on its face. In its implementation it does a poor job of capturing meaningful data and instead gives false sense of security that effective monitoring is being done. A good VAERS would, at least, have the capacity of evolving as a better tool. It would also take seriously the need to train caregivers and staff in its effective use, like any good tool. Instead VEARS is a poor facsimile giving the illusion of monitoring. Who developed the app anyway? It is so poor as to seem deliberately so. Especially in the "app era."
Wow, so sorry to hear your story. You're 100% right about the summary/abstract/conclusion parts of covid research studies--probably true for all drugs under patent--or not if the drug might compete with one still valuable ($$$). One has to go to the actual data. All three letter agencies and new (and some old) medical treatments are guilty until proven otherwise by unconflicted sources.
It should be. Or at the very least they should have at least contacted the people who were claiming injuries. I think the reason they reacted so quickly to my missing report, when I did get a real Vaers person, is that I let that real person know I had screen saved my entry. And I have the submission number and everything. I had proof. Interestingly, 2 years later, I learned that my lot number of my first Moderna was one of the very "hot" lots associated with the most deaths and injuries.
I have read so many papers during the scamdemic whose results say one thing but their title and abstract say another. I don't recall ever running into this diabolic phenomena until covid 19. The first time I noticed it was the much cited paper saying "vaccines are safe for pregnant women". But if you read the actual data within it is chilling and no pregnant person should come anywhere near one of these injections. As a 67-year-old woman who got myo- pericarditis Within 24 hours of her first Moderna Feb 2021. I'm glad to see they are mentioning females. There have actually been several papers showing that females are more susceptible but the narrative remains that it is primarily young males. I Personally suspect it is every age and sex but that's an inconvenient truth. It's more noticeable in young active people Who until now rarely had heart issues. By the time you hit your 60s The medical community blows you off because you might already have other problems. I actually had no other health problems and only go to the Doctor once a year for the mandatory and ridiculous medicare visit. So 4 weeks of chest pain, Left arm and shoulder pain and breathlessness and extreme fatigue ( fatigue and breathlessness lasted 3 months), was alarming. My GP and my cardiologist both insisted "it could not possibly be related to the safe and effective vaccine that I had just had". VAERS Initially deleted my report. When I realized it several months later, I pointed it out to an actual person at Vaers and they acted embarrassed and reinstated it immediately. In those naive early days I honestly thought Vaers would call me for more details because of this alarming result. But no one ever called of course. It was easier to simply delete the report. How many other reports did they delete because they didn't fit the narrative?
That was the beginning of the end of my faith in the medical community. Well actually I've been a skeptic for a number of years, but I generally thought the 3 letter agencies and doctors had our best interest in mind. Now I sadly know better. At this point I realized we were each on our own to figure this thing out. Are any of these doctors reading these papers or listening to their patients?Or does the band simply keep playing on the tune of "safe and effective"?
VAERS is a decent idea on its face. In its implementation it does a poor job of capturing meaningful data and instead gives false sense of security that effective monitoring is being done. A good VAERS would, at least, have the capacity of evolving as a better tool. It would also take seriously the need to train caregivers and staff in its effective use, like any good tool. Instead VEARS is a poor facsimile giving the illusion of monitoring. Who developed the app anyway? It is so poor as to seem deliberately so. Especially in the "app era."
Wow, so sorry to hear your story. You're 100% right about the summary/abstract/conclusion parts of covid research studies--probably true for all drugs under patent--or not if the drug might compete with one still valuable ($$$). One has to go to the actual data. All three letter agencies and new (and some old) medical treatments are guilty until proven otherwise by unconflicted sources.
They deleted your report? Omg. That should be a criminal offense.
It should be. Or at the very least they should have at least contacted the people who were claiming injuries. I think the reason they reacted so quickly to my missing report, when I did get a real Vaers person, is that I let that real person know I had screen saved my entry. And I have the submission number and everything. I had proof. Interestingly, 2 years later, I learned that my lot number of my first Moderna was one of the very "hot" lots associated with the most deaths and injuries.