Yep….take that vax

[PaceAdvantage]

Big Pharma was EXEMPT from liability on these shots.

And nobody thought that was a problem.

Imagine.

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Big Pharma was EXEMPT from liability on these shots.

And nobody thought that was a problem.

Imagine.

The day they made that announcement I told my wife we would never take it

[Jeff P]

The Daily Sceptic | By Rebekah Barnett | 3 May 2023 1:30 PM
Ivermectin Ban Lifted in Australia:
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/05/03/...-in-australia/

Doctors will be free to prescribe ivermectin ‘off-label’ from June 1st 2023, the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) announced today.

This is a reversal of a national ban on off-label prescribing of ivermectin, which the TGA enacted on September 10th 2021, in an attempt to prevent doctors from prescribing the drug to treat Covid.

-jp
.

[ElKabong]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

The day they made that announcement I told my wife we would never take it

Same here

The pushed agenda all along was selling the vax to govt entities that tried to shame non vaxers, instead of effective treatment. No thanks.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by ElKabong

Same here

The pushed agenda all along was selling the vax to govt entities that tried to shame non vaxers, instead of effective treatment. No thanks.

And what is so utterly amazing is how many people just couldn't see through that agenda -- even to this day.

[Inner Dirt]

Even to this day there are still a lot of pro vaxers. I stopped at 2 shots I got Covid 2 times after getting the shots.

[Jeff P]

Twitter

-jp
.

__________________
Team JCapper: 2011 PAIHL Regular Season ROI Leader after 15 weeks
www.JCapper.com

[Jeff P]

npj | Vaccines | Published: 02 May 2023
Risk assessment of retinal vascular occlusion after COVID-19 vaccination:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41541-023-00661-7

Results
Patient characteristics and stratified analysis

The TriNetX network collected information on a total of 95,156,967 individuals, of whom 7,318,437 met the inclusion criteria. Figure 1 presents the flowchart of patient selection. After excluding cases with confirmation of COVID-19 diagnosis, 6,755,737 individuals were separated into two cohorts: 883,177 vaccinated and 5,871,737 unvaccinated individuals. In both cohorts, any diagnosis of retinal vascular occlusion six months prior to the index date was excluded. We also considered the effect of systemic medications and excluded cases with the use of any antiplatelets, anticoagulants, diuretics, contraceptives, or antihemorrhages 4 weeks prior to the index date. Ultimately, 745,041 vaccinated and 3,874,458 unvaccinated individuals remained. We matched 739,066 vaccinated cohorts to the unvaccinated cohort at a ratio of 1:1. Table 1 presents the baseline characteristics of the study population. After matching, the average age of the vaccinated group was 52.5 ± 18.5 years, whereas the unvaccinated group was 52.2 ± 18.2 years. There were no differences in any of the variables between the two cohorts. Table 2 reveals the stratified analysis based on age, sex, and race. Individuals aged from 18 to 64 years has increased risk of retinal vascular occlusion except for CRAO.

From the study, link to Table 2 Stratified analysis of risk of retinal vascualr occlusion exposed to COVID-19 vaccines compared with unvaccinated individuals in 2 years:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s415...661-7/tables/2

clickable thumbnails below

In every age group and every demographic:

The vaccinated are about 2 times more likely to develop retinal vascular occlusion than the unvaccinated.

Fyi, retinal occlusion is a blood clot in the eye (a serious condition.)


-jp

.

[horses4courses]

3 jabs so far......

Imagine........no second head growing....no tail.....no webbed feet.
Most importantly, though, no COVID-19.......

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by horses4courses

3 jabs so far......

Imagine........no second head growing....no tail.....no webbed feet.
Most importantly, though, no COVID-19.......

Therefore, you should count your blessings and thank God for your good fortune, for their of millions around the world who have a very different story to tell.

[davew]

judge orders release of data earlier than 24 yrs


https://www.theepochtimes.com/judge-...e-btn-copylink

[Jeff P]

Cureus | Kuhbandner C, Reitzner M (May 23, 2023)
Estimation of Excess Mortality in Germany During 2020-2022:
https://www.cureus.com/articles/1494...g-2020-2022#!/


The following excerpt can be found by scrolling about three quarters of the way down into the study:

COVID-19 vaccination and mortality

In April 2021, an extensive COVID-19 vaccination campaign started in Germany. Regarding the relationship between excess mortality and vaccinations, if the vaccinations successfully prevent people from dying from COVID-19, a straightforward prediction is that excess mortality should decrease with an increased number of vaccinated persons.

To explore this hypothesis, the course of the cumulative number of fully vaccinated and triple vaccinated persons recorded by the Robert Koch Institute [27] and the cumulative number of excess deaths since the beginning of the pandemic is shown in Figure 8. At times, when more people are dying than expected, the cumulative number of excess deaths increases, and when less people are dying than expected, the cumulative number of excess deaths decreases.



As is visible in Figure 8, the obvious hypothesis of a decrease in excess mortality with an increasing number of vaccinated persons is not correct. During periods when many persons were vaccinated, excess mortality seems to have increased more strongly compared to the same periods in the previous pandemic year. During the first and second vaccination periods in spring and summer 2021, an increase in cumulative excess mortality is observed, while the year before a decrease was observed. During the period of the third vaccination, parallel to the increase in vaccinations, an increase in cumulative excess mortality can be observed that starts earlier than in the year before. And in 2022, when large parts of the population have been vaccinated, the cumulative number of excess deaths showed a further increase, which even exceeds the previous pandemic year without vaccinations. There seem to be negative long-term effects either of the SARS-CoV-2 infections, COVID-19 measures, the COVID-19 vaccination, or most probably a combination of these.

Scrolling down a little further:

To further explore the short-term relationship between vaccinations and excess mortality, the courses of the number of vaccinated persons and the number of excess deaths per month are shown in Figure 9.



Inspecting the numbers of vaccinations and excess deaths per month confirms the above impression: Other than in the year before, during the months with a high number of the first, second, and third vaccinations, also a high number of excess deaths was observed. The temporal relationship between the courses of vaccinations and excess deaths is especially pronounced for the third vaccination. In September and October 2021, the initial small increase in the number of third vaccinations was accompanied by a comparably small increase in excess deaths. In November and December 2021, the number of third vaccinations increased sharply, accompanied by a comparably sharp increase in excess deaths. In January 2022, the number of third vaccinations decreased sharply, accompanied by a comparably sharp decrease in the number of excess deaths.

Taken together, in 2021, with the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, a higher excess mortality is observed than in the previous year in the months when large numbers of persons were vaccinated. In 2022, when large parts of the population were fully or even triple vaccinated, excess mortality is constantly increasing from spring onward, reaching a maximum of 28% in December. Such an observation is difficult to reconcile with the assumption that COVID-19 vaccinations are highly effective against COVID-19 deaths. Either the vaccinations are not as successful as expected, or the vaccinations successfully prevent COVID-19 deaths, but there are suddenly other factors than COVID-19 that lead to an increasing number of unexpected deaths in 2021 and 2022.

Regarding the latter possibility, it is interesting to consider the course of excess mortality in the different age groups shown in Figure 4. The mortality wave at the turn of the year from 2020 to 2021 is characterized by a strong age dependency, which follows the age-dependent risk of COVID-19: excess mortality is higher in older people and is completely absent in the age groups below 30 years. This pattern is substantially changing from April 2021 onward at the time when more and more people were vaccinated. Suddenly, excess mortality appears that is no longer dependent on age and even observed in young age groups. This speaks against the possibility that COVID-19 was the underlying cause. Further observe that in the younger age groups, where vaccination started later, excess mortality also starts later.

From the perspective of pharmacovigilance, the simultaneous onset of excess mortality and vaccinations represents a safety signal. Safety signals such as the observation of a temporal relationship between the administration of vaccines and the occurrence of adverse events do not necessarily imply a causal relationship since there may be potential third variables that influence both the course of vaccinations and the course of excess deaths. Thus, a safety signal does not indicate a causal relationship between a side effect and a drug but is only a hypothesis that calls for further assessment.

Scrolling down a little further:

In fact, in a study by a research team led by Schirmacher [28], out of 35 bodies found unexpectedly dead at home with unclear causes of death within 20 days following COVID vaccination, autopsies revealed causes of death due to pre-existing illnesses in only 10 cases. From the remaining 25 cases, in three cases, it was concluded from the autopsies that vaccination-induced myocarditis was the likely cause of death, and in two cases, it was concluded that vaccination-induced myocarditis was possibly the cause of death. As shown in Supplementary Table 1 published by Schwab et al. [28], vaccination was the cause of death in further cases as well.

Given the temporal relationship between the increase in vaccinations and excess mortality, it seems surprising that a respective safety signal has not been detected in the pharmacovigilance by the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut (PEI), which is responsible for the safety monitoring of drugs in Germany. A closer inspection of the methods used by the PEI to monitor possibly deadly side effects of the COVID-19 vaccinations [29] reveals that a flawed safety analysis is used that will not indicate a safety signal even if a vaccine causes extremely large numbers of unexpected deaths.

Excess mortality everywhere the vaccines were rolled out is real.

Correlation is not causation.

Especially if, as the authors of the study contend, government health agencies have been employing flawed methodologies to hide safety signals from an unsuspecting populace.



-jp
.

[classhandicapper]

It’s a shame we don’t have public executions anymore (after a fair trial) because the evidence continues to mount that these vaccines were not only mostly useless but dangerous. Just think about what happened here. The virus was very likely created in a lab by scumbags like Fauci and the IC and then they rolled out a vaccine, made 10s of billions of dollars, and that vaccine may have done more harm than good.

[classhandicapper]

“Correlation is not causation.”

This is a serious question/comment.

The above is clearly an accurate statement, but it seems to me that absent a clear cut cause, a LOGICAL correlation is a very good candidate for cause. Yet whenever faced with this situation they always fall back on on the “correlation is not causation” defense. I think it’s BS. Even if you are not 100% sure of the cause, the correlation itself should generate caution until you do know cause.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

“Correlation is not causation.”

This is a serious question/comment.

The above is clearly an accurate statement, but it seems to me that absent a clear cut cause, a LOGICAL correlation is a very good candidate for cause. Yet whenever faced with this situation they always fall back on on the “correlation is not causation” defense. I think it’s BS. Even if you are not 100% sure of the cause, the correlation itself should generate caution until you do know cause.

Well said! Correlation should raise [b]yellow, proceed with caution[b] flags. But this never happened with this scamdemic. In fact, it seems caution was tossed out to the four winds. Prudence was MIA during this fiasco.