How do you judge a vaccine program? Dr. Vinay Prasad: Excess Mortality is not the only measure that matters. All of these things matter:
1. Results in receipt of the vaccine among people who benefit.
2. Minimizes receipt of the vaccine among those who do not benefit (in absence of herd immunity considerations)
3. Voluntary choice is better than coercion
4. Informed consent is better than uninformed persuasion (values freedom)
5. If herd immunity is at play— i.e. if the vax halts transmission— researchers demonstrate the threshold necessary and prioritizes #3
6. Researchers do not delay FDA EUA of the vaccine merely to sabotage an ongoing election
7. Regulators monitors safety concerns carefully, and rapidly respond to changes.
Prasad concludes:
These 7 metrics are more comprehensive than excess mortality, and should be the basis to judge vaccine programs. By these metrics, because of the the heavy handed use of mandates and the negligent FDA regulation, the USA does not do well.
Each of these highly placed people forgot to mention what research they were relying on when they stated as fact that getting the vax would stop transmission.
I was vaccinated twice and boosted once. I now regret receiving all of those shots, and it goes well beyond and rampant scientific and public health fraud being revealed, including the outrageous paper orchestrated by Anthony Fauci, “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2.” And see here and here. I'm not a scientist or a doctor, but I can see and hear and follow these discussions. We were told none of these things prior to being compelled to take these shots (except by Brett Weinstein, on a video that was pulled down by Youtube).
So here we now are. I am among a growing number of people concerned about the long-term hazards of these treatments, which were touted as "safe." Here are the most recent revelations. First, this discussion involving biologists Brett Weinstein and Heather Heying. The podcast focuses on commentary by Dr. John Campbell, an admission by Dr. Paul Offit and a new Swiss active-surveillance study: "Sex-specific differences in myocardial injury incidence after COVID-19 mRNA-1273 Booster Vaccination."
What do the Pfizer spokesmen not how ro say about the causal pathway from the "safe" vaccination it produced for COVID? They have no public answer. Rather than provide an answer, they purposefully and shamelessly obstruct and deflect:
Back to the issue of myocarditis and pericarditis. First, some definitions.
Myocarditis: "Myocarditis is inflammation of the heart muscle (myocardium). The inflammation can reduce the heart's ability to pump blood. Myocarditis can cause chest pain, shortness of breath, and rapid or irregular heart rhythms (arrhythmias)."
Pericarditis: "Pericarditis is swelling and irritation of the thin, saclike tissue surrounding the heart (pericardium). Pericarditis often causes sharp chest pain. The chest pain occurs when the irritated layers of the pericardium rub against each other."
Commentary by Dr. John Campbell on the new study: Based on this brand new high-quality active surveillance study one person out of 35 who received the Moderna booster incurred vaccine-related heart injuries:
If Regulators around the world don't take notice of the information I'm about to give via this paper, then they are at best in my view negligent at worst they don't even want to think about it. After receiving Moderna booster vaccines in a trial done in Switzerland--there were 777 working people followed up with 777 controls--5.1 percent of those who had the booster vaccine had increased troponins, indicating cardiomyocyte damage. So 5.1% increased cardiac marker damage, chemicals in the blood. 2.8 percent of the 777--that is one in 35--one in 35--had vaccine-associated myocardial injury. Quite astounding and incredible.
This is the result of receiving the Moderna booster. Many of us received two shots prior to receiving the booster. Brett Weinstein and Heather Heying suggest that one who receives all three shots have even higher risk of sustaining heart damage--greater than 1 out of 35 and just because you don't experience short term damage does not mean that you are out of the woods. I was horrified to hear the entire podcast of Weinstein and Heying. If I know there was even a 1 out of 1,000 risk of sustaining heart damage by receiving one shot, I would have refused any of this "treatment." None of us were warned, however. This is the opposite of informed consent.
How many of the elite athletes collapsing (some of them severely injured or dead) were caused by the vaccines? Many people actively do not want to know and do not want to report any of this. What concerns me is that there seems to be a coordinated nonchalance about whether the COVID vaccines are causing the increase in cardiac arrests.
Here is the entire podcast featuring the discussion of Weinstein & Heying:
I posted the John Campbell video on FB with a quote by Campbell. Instead of allowing me to post it, here's what happened:
When you click the "See Why" button:
Who are these "Independent fact-checkers" who know so much more than Dr. John Campbell? Facebook does not disclose this. Are they former employees of the FBI or CIA or DHS? If so, are they consciously adhering to a narrative dictated by the U.S. Government? I'd like to know.
Nurse currently working in A and E with a demonstrated history in Nurse Education. Skilled in pratical Nursing, Healthcare, Nursing Research, and Health and Educational research. Strong healthcare services professional with two higher degrees and several teaching qualifications. Research record focused in teaching bioscience in national and international nurse education.
"The FDA is like Pfizer's lap dog. It's a little puppy dog that does whatever Pfizer says. It's enriching Pfizer and screwing the American people...There is no credible data that ever supported the booster that I was compelled by my employer to get at the risk of being fired...We caught them red handed. They slipped up. They gave us a piece of data that they didn't want to give us.". . . The FDA is like Pfizer's lap dog. It's a little puppy dog that does whatever Pfizer says. It's enriching Pfizer and screwing the American people...It rots the core of public health. I don't trust public health anymore and I am a public health expert...
Contrary to the claims of the psychotherapy myth, humans can be resilient and tough-minded; they can suffer the slings and arrows of life without expensive interventions from “experts.” . . .
Thus, a healthy culture should teach that life is often full of misery, dashed hopes, and thwarted desires; it should teach that agony, anguish, and despair are ineradicable parts of the human experience, not aberrant or fleeting intrusions; it should encourage more stoicism, more discipline, more sacrifice; and it should discourage cossetting, indulgence, and morbid contemplation. Reflecting obsessively upon grievances and hardships, like constantly fiddling with a wound, is unwholesome.
Furthermore, the idea that understanding the cause of one’s suffering is the key to curing it is dubious ...Often, the disease is not in the head, but in the society. And thus, even if psychotherapy were highly effective, it might be a dangerous distraction.
The idea that the good therapist is a highly skilled mental engineer who knows how to manipulate the complicated machinery of the human psyche has been memorably promoted in movies such as “Ordinary People,” and, if it were true, it might justify the exorbitant salary some therapists command. But alas, it is no truer than the Freudianism that spawned it; and despite its veneer of sophistication and scientism, psychotherapy ultimately remains a human interaction, purchased at great expense to the patient and perhaps to society.
People will always want to talk to other people about their miseries and insecurities, flaws and failures, hopes and dreams; and counselors and therapists will remain employed into the foreseeable future. Some may even do considerable good. But we hope they will drop the pernicious mythology, the exorbitant prices, and the complicated and often unnecessary licensing system and recognize the simple but tragic fact that many people are desperate for sympathetic social partners and will pay a lot of money for them. What is needed is not more expensively trained experts, but more real social relationships.
Hello, I invite you to subscribe to Dangerous Intersection by entering your email below. You will have the option to receive emails notifying you of new posts once per week or more often.
