Make It Difficult for People in Their Lives and They Get Vaccinated

During a House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus hearing Monday, Rep. Rich McCormick (R-GA) questioned Dr. Fauci on a statement on vaccine requirements he made during a recorded interview.

Video Source

“It’s been proven that when you make it difficult for people in their lives, they lose their ideological bullshit, and they get vaccinated.” Official Quote by Anthony Stephen Fauci

Note: When Fauci says proven, he is clearly referring to the science behind psychological manipulating the public. He says he is a man of science, so people should hold him to that.

Just a few years ago Fauci was crowning himself as the "King of Science". This includes the famous quote where he stated that if you disagree with him, you are disagreeing with science.

It might be your first time hearing these shocking comments by Fauci, but this is him behind the mask.

So what does it mean for Australia?

Undoubtedly these same types of scientific types of people that rise to the top of bureaucratic government positions all over the world. I suspect that this is because most people they grow up in school and they think science is easy. Students just repeat what is in the textbook and they score high marks because they can regurgitate facts and memorise a formula. By the way if you didn't realise, that is not real science and just shows how poorly structured the current educational system is as it emphasises the regurgitation of facts.

People forget the Therapeutic Goods Administration is not an independent organisation. There is nothing special about the people inside that organisation, maybe they learned a few extra years of some topic at university and I hope they at least are at a standard to which they have written a thesis which is basically a long essay on a specialised topic. Some thesis papers are absolutely garbage in my opinion. But most importantly it reveals that these types of people are just ordinary people. They are just government workers to be more specific. They know very little and more critically they especially know nothing about a new pandemic. They know nothing more than the average citizen. Governments should not be given the right to control how people behave in a pandemic.

The problem is this lack of knowledge is not just constrained to scientists, but humans in general. I have met many barristers and solicitors, even former judges. Believe it or not sometimes cannot even recall the facts of a case I mention or recall key legislation in their field of expertise after a bit of uhm and ahing. If you told me if I remembered some facts of an obscure case I would probably tell you, "I am not sure myself, I believe it was something involving some type of snail-like object in the bottle, but I would not commit myself to that". However, you will often notice that because of the immunity granted to bureaucrats that they will not be frank and honest with you about what they don't know. This is why you cannot trust the government.

This is why it is my opinion that the public should focus on replacing government with uncensored artificial intelligence. People should not be scared of it. This is the reality that faces us and I don't see why the public puts so much emphasis on the government to protect its citizens when it is basically not well equipped to do any such thing. For example, the government cannot represent the people properly because the number of representatives does not account for the growth in the population. Even if representation somehow worked at the time when the Constitution was written, it clearly no longer functions as it was intended to. Has the number of senators and representatives increased by 7x in line with population growth? No it has not, representation has gone backwards to a tune of 7x. Even if you believed the government worked for the good of the people, you cannot deny that the representation has been watered down so much. I am not saying that would fix the issues immediately as there are core problems with the existence of government.

If it were a real pandemic then everyone would be clamouring to get vaccinated (provided that vaccine worked and did not have an even higher death rate than the disease it was preventing) and those foolish people who remain unvaccinated, pardon my words, will be left to rely on their natural immunity. I am sure many of the people within the anti-vax movement understand this core principle.

Bill Gates is a kind of famous oracle and he states that another type of pandemic will happen again. Time and time again his predictions/wisdom ironically seems to come true. Apparently the cusp of another Bird Flu Pandemic is here.

Ask yourself: Are you going to make the same choices next time?

Would you honestly take another experimental bird flu vaccine?

Comments

      • +8

        Fact is the vax bypassed all the controls that were in place for a reason. You know the years of testing and trials for a start. And we still don:t know the contents of those vials because it's still under "emergency use authorisation". Total joke if it wasn't so sad.
        People weren't informed so it was impossible for them to give informed consent. You know, the first priciple from Nuremberg, also required in Australia.
        Sorry but the people backing this scam are simply in fairy land at this point.

        • +3

          Fact is the vax bypassed all the controls that were in place for a reason.

          I remember when the "plant-based" industry were using terms like beef or chicken,
          the meat industry took offence to this and kind of banned them from using those terms,
          because beef is of a cow and chicken is … well,…chicken.

          So, after that directive from the meat industry, I started to see names such as "chick'n" for a plant-based variation of …well…chicken.

          Having the name, means you've 'earned' that right to use it,
          or the name is intrinsically and inherently what its make-up is.

          To not do any medical trials and still call something it isn't, by virtue of its existence, is the actual trickery and deceptive behaviour. If ACCC can have all these rules around "deceptive" marketing or "bait advertising" for products, then applying these concepts would reveal where the dodginess was for the products which got emergency approval.

          By the way, the TGA gets something like 70%? 80%? 90%? "funding" from private companies.
          This was written in Dr. MA Demasi's substack blog.

      • -3

        It is a vaccine. Negs well deserved.

        • +2

          No it aint.

    • +38

      Also speaking to my cardiologist he's seen a massive uptick in heart issues.

      Your cardiologist should be speaking up about this if he believes it is related to the medical countermeasures rollout, but it will come with a huge cost to them personally.

      • +45

        Hence why they don't. A few have and they get absolutely vilified in the media and threatened with losing their medical license. Most people haven't got the stomach for that.

        • +5

          True.

          • +20

            @mrdean: There's also a decent probability that people didn't seek medical attention during lockdown. Could be vaccines affecting heart. Could also be the effects of having COVID19 on the heart, there's been evidence in brain of issues as well (esp. with long COVID).

            • -1

              @GabrielB:

              (esp. with long COVID).

              Most of the cases of so called long covid can be attributable to the medical countermeasures, not the alleged virus. This should be obvious to anyone who reads the individual submissions to the parliamentary long covid inquiry late last year. Submission after submission documents the emergence post jab of long covid, but the individuals never make the connection. That whole inquiry was a sham.

        • +4

          Most people haven't got the stomach for that.

          Nothing to do with stomach my friend. More to do with career and bank account growth.

          • +11

            @Mad Max: I believe there are some who are afraid to speak up. How many is impossible to know. Those who covet career & $$$ have convinced themselves with "safe & effective".

            • +13

              @mrdean: The majority of doctors and specialists that decided to speak up were close to retirement so they could afford to do so.
              All the other ones had to make a decision between the truth and their career, lifestyle, family, commitments, etc.

              • +5

                @Mad Max:

                All the other ones had to make a decision between the truth and their career, lifestyle, family, commitments, etc.

                Yeah, but IMO the majority of those genuinely believe (or at least believed back then) in vaccines, even though these were medical countermeasures. They didn't have to make a decision because they were already blue-pilled.

                I have no idea how many truly know about the dangers of vaccines (even pre-2020) but who try to ignore it & just do the work because they can't afford to lose their job.

            • +1

              @mrdean: If only TEH GUBERMINT was open about the risks instead of HIDING EVERYTHING their SECRET AGENDA…oh wait

        • +17

          You don't lose your medical license for speaking out. You lose it because you speak out with no regard for the objective facts. 70% of the worlds population has received one dose of the Covid 19 vaccine, with 13.58 billion covid shots administered globally. With those numbers if the vaccine was causing these uptick in other health issues, then the figures would reflect it, which they don't. Stop wasting everybody's time on this conspiracy rubbish and instead join the adults in discussing how we can learn from Covid pandemics and better handle future pandemics.

          • -1

            @letmesee: Ok let's imagine everyone got the vaccine.
            Why did I get covid again with worse symptoms than when I wasn't vaccinated?
            If the vaccine works only for certain strains of covid why with each strain the news tells us to go and get more booster shots of old vaccines without any evidence that it would be helpful for the new variant?
            Best case scenario is that vaccines didn't work. But they had no side effects and billions of dollars got wasted and still being wasted.

            • +5

              @Mi2: The point was so the hospitals didn't fill up and we wouldn't have as many deaths. It is like the flu, but brand new so nobody had any antibodies built up, so it was very infections.

              • -1

                @crfnx: Ignoring all other aspects of health and immune system and promoting vaccines constantly as the only hope is an example of misleading people for profit.
                I have a friend who believes that he won't get sick during winter with flu shot.
                He doesn't even understand the difference between flu and cold.
                He does it maybe twice because his GP told him. And still getting sick.
                I was on the same boat before I started paying attention to other aspects.
                The whole point is that we have to focus on making sure that everyone has a strong immune system to being with.
                Checking their D level, zinc and etc.
                If this doesn't work or reduce the number of hospitalisations then we go for the vaccine.
                Last year my D level was 51 and my GP told me that I'm not deficient because it's not below 50. How ridiculous. Caught cold multiple times that year.
                Now it's 90 which is even higher than their summer standard and feeling better than ever.
                Not even a runny nose which was something normal for me the whole year.

            • +6

              @Mi2: Do you really not know the answers to these questions by now? I suppose it's hard to find them on whatever conspiracy website or fake news site you frequent.

              "Why did I get covid again with worse symptoms than when I wasn't vaccinated?"

              Because of different strains of the virus and because of different levels of infection, and because of any other variance in your personal health at the time.

              I don't know why it is so difficult for you conspiracy types to understand the imprecise nature of biology. The effectiveness of any medical intervention is going to vary person to person, as does the severity of any ailment. Vaccines are a type of prevention that works amazingly well in aggregate, but can't really guarantee the same results for every individual.

              "why with each strain the news tells us to go and get more booster shots of old vaccines without any evidence that it would be helpful for the new variant?"

              The vaccines aren't either going to work or not, they will have variable effectiveness per strain. This means that any covid vaccine is going to be better than none regardless of the strain.

              "Best case scenario is that vaccines didn't work. But they had no side effects and billions of dollars got wasted and still being wasted."

              Covid vaccines have saved millions of lives and reduced the overall suffering of countless others, and have also reduced the impact on health care around the world.

              "side effects"

              All medicines have side effects. If you cared to look up the data, Covid vaccine side effects are very mild and low risk. Much lower risk than having Covid (especially having Covid when not vaccinated).

              • +1

                @djgreedo:

                All medicines have side effects. If you cared to look up the data, Covid vaccine side effects are very mild and low risk. Much lower risk than having Covid (especially having Covid when not vaccinated).

                Do you really not comprehend the point people are trying to make here?

                The 'data' comes from the trials that were run.

                Who pays for the trials? The manufacturer does.
                Who runs the trials? A third party company. Has having privatised building inspections in NSW worked out well, or do you think it's a case of producing the result that the person who pays wants?
                Are the trials run in a scientifically sound way? The Pfizer trial started off as blind but was then unblinded due to 'ethical concerns that the control group were remaining unvaccinated while a pandemic was going on'. Therefore comparing reported adverse events in the vaccinated group becomes meaningless when the control group also had the vaccine. No problems to see here!
                Why were we only given 'curated' data on this.
                Why don't you read this article that explains how bad the trials were: https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/04/peter-doshi-pfizer-and-…
                Let me guess, the British Medical Journal is a now conspiracy theory website?

                Approval:
                Who approves the drug to go to market? A government body does.
                Who funds the government body that does the approvals (here, the UK and the US)? Drug companies provide the overwhelming majority of their funds. Here the TGA gets over 93% of its funding from industry.
                Could there possibly be any issue or conflict of interest there?

                Why does Pfizer want the trial data sealed away for 75 years? What could possibly be in there that they don't want us to know about?

            • @Mi2: Is the answer "you don't know the difference between a highly subjective personal anecdote and evidence arising from population studies undertaken by qualified experts"?

          • -1

            @letmesee: Hey there genius who knows it all.

            Could you please inform us children why excess mortality remains inflated in countries where the vaccine has a high uptake compared to those who don't?
            When you subtract the reported covid deaths away from ours there is still a massive uptick in those that are dying compared to expected values. No one seems to be able to explain this but surely you can oh wise one.

            So all of these educated doctors that have spoke out so far and suffered consequences is because they were repeating unobjective facts? Oh yes that's right, they mustn't have gotten approval from the ministry of truth first?

            How about you let the adults talk and you continue pretending that we live in utopia.

            • +1

              @glennski: No genius here, just know when to listen to people that are way smarter than me, instead of some deadbeat grifters on the web.

              If your claim that excess mortality remains inflated because of the covid shot, why haven't the anti-vax medical fraternity been able to prove it is directly attributed to the vaccine. You know do some research, put forward a peer reviewed paper and let the experts discuss it and evaluate the data. Instead all we get is cherry picked data, which doesn't take into consideration other factors that may be at play.

              You realise educated doctors get their license revoked and sued for malpractice all the time, all around the world. even before covid. Just because they are a doctor doesn't mean they get it right all the time. However if the vast majority of specialist in a certain medical field are saying something, and have published and peer reviewed evidence , I tend to believe them more so than a small group who provide as evidence the classic but this one doctor did a study and it found this hidden treasure of truth nonsense. But lets put your argument to a logic test. Those doctors that did speak the truth, would probably be lets say very generously 5% of the worlds doctors/medical professionals, which makes the other 95% of the world's doctors/medical professionals liars because they are either cowards for not speaking up against it, or they wanted to eventually kill you with a vaccine shot. Wake up, you had a good run thinking you were about to uncover the "real truth", but its over. Time to move on to the next conspiracy.

              • -1

                @letmesee: @letmesee

                Ok let's now have a proper convo.

                why haven't the anti-vax medical fraternity been able to prove it is directly attributed to the vaccine. You know do some research, put forward a peer reviewed paper and let the experts discuss it and evaluate the data.

                There isn't a 'anti-vax medical fraternity' per-se. There are people in the medical fraternity who have concern on the safety of these novel products which would normally have to go through a 10+ year approval process (obviously for safety reasons).

                Studies on mortality have and continue to be done. Here is one example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38274635/

                You'll notice that this paper has been retracted (by the journal). Why? Well you can google the names of the authors and read the litany of 'fact check' and newspapers takes on the claims made in the paper. Their names are now smeared forever on the internet.
                Why would they volunteer to ruin their names by publishing these papers?
                Is it 'science' that is happening here?
                One of the authors writes an article to offer some insight: https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/retracted-covid-19-…

                This immense pressure from media and retraction from the journal is not a case of 'let the experts discuss it and evaluate the data', IMHO it is censorship, bullying and smearing.

                'Oh but the fact check says they were promoters of dangerous misinformation like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin as treatments, it even points to a study showing that they're not effective'
                Yes there are studies that conclude that ivermectin is not effective in treatment of covid symptoms.
                Yes there are studies that conclude that ivermectin is highly effective in treatment of covid symptoms, such as https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8248252/

                So, why aren't studies like the one above being talked about? Well you tell me. All I know is that despite the existence of positive studies for treatment using this drug it was shut down instantly in this country by the TGA once it gained publicity. In the US this drug was vilified as 'Horse medicine' and not fit for human consumption by their equivalent agency to the TGA. Ivermectin has been around for 6 decades, won the scientists who worked on it Nobel prizes for medicine, and is on the WHO's list of essential medicines.

                It's worth pointing out that Ivermectin is a generic drug (off patent) which costs a single digit dollar amount for a course of treatment, whereas Paxlovid and Lagevrio cost over $1000. There are of course studies which promote Paxlovid for example as being great, and others not so much like this - https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanwpc/article/PIIS2666-6065(23)00012-3/fulltext

                Would emergency authorisation for the vaccines have been granted if there was already effective treatment available to prevent serious disease?

                Instead all we get is cherry picked data, which doesn't take into consideration other factors that may be at play.

                Can you give some examples of this?

                However if the vast majority of specialist in a certain medical field are saying something, and have published and peer reviewed evidence , I tend to believe them more so than a small group who provide as evidence

                I get that people like to think like this but it goes against scientific principals to write off the minority. Science is a process and not a belief system. Science is never settled. Scientific findings should and are often challenged if there is reason or evidence to do so. Many of the papers on this topic are at odds with each other. My question is why have things unfolded the way they have in the last several years? Why was there a 2 meter rule with social distancing despite there being no evidence to support it providing any benefit? Why were we wearing cloth and surgical masks despite evidence that they did nothing at all to prevent transmission? Why were we wiping down every surface with alcohol sanitiser despite no evidence that transmission was happening via surface? Why did we abandon our pandemic plan that was in place before covid 19? Why were we told that the vaccine would prevent transmission yet everyone got covid? Why was natural immunity from prior infection not acceptable in place of a vaccination shot when it came to mandates? Why was it touted that vaccination was the only way out of the pandemic, ignoring the possibility of treatment?

                Just because they are a doctor doesn't mean they get it right all the time.

                I never said they can't be wrong. Pro-vaxxers like to argue that anti-vaxxers are either grifters or flat earth sov cit dummies (they often are btw). I was making the point that there are educated professionals that are in the medical industry calling for inquiry.

                which makes the other 95% of the world's doctors/medical professionals liars because they are either cowards for not speaking up against it, or they wanted to eventually kill you with a vaccine shot

                That's a very unsophisticated look at it. How many GPs do you think had time to look into this when they were worried about the massive restructure of their businesses/jobs to do telehealth, see the massive influx of patients. Many would see the circulars sent to them by the health department, AMA etc. assuring that the vax was the real deal and assume that nothing was out of order or untoward. Many would be vaccinated themselves or have it mandated by their employer. I don't blame or hold any grudge for those that had suspicions but kept quiet for the sake of their livelihood. But I would commend those few who have risked a lot to speak out. See this link that Cobalt_ posted just below - https://thewest.com.au/news/coronavirus/covid-19-doctors-for…
                Is this line of thinking that hard to swallow?

                Time to move on to the next conspiracy.

                Like what? The Earth is certainly a sphere and sovereign citizens are double digit IQ. 5G doesn't do anything and there are no 'microchips' in vaccines.
                There are many people out there with such a distrust in the government and media who will believe anything you tell them without evidence if it goes against what the government or media says.
                There are also others who have such a trust in what government and media say that they will never question it at all.
                I believe that we would be better off in this country if there were less people in both the above groups, and stopped falling for newspaper x and government party x from pitting group x of people against group y of people who subscribe to government party y and newspaper y.

                I'd invite you to broaden your mind by having a look at some of the links posted and giving some critical thought to the arguments I've given.

      • +17

        It's a pity doctors were threatened with being de-registered by AHPRA if they so much as voiced concerns about COVID therapeutics and treatments.
        https://thewest.com.au/news/coronavirus/covid-19-doctors-for…

      • +14

        Could the heart issues be from the virus, not the vaccine?

        • -5

          Possible, but unlikely if heart issues arose post jab.

          • @mrdean: /taps forehead

            Deep thinking here /s

            Do "what are the odds all this autism is diagnosed right around the time kids get vaccinated" next

            Remember to just ignore concepts like correlation and causality, just choose your own adventure, man

        • -2

          The staggering increase of early deaths via unexplained heart conditions in healthy people is only effecting the jabbed. There's no increase at all in those who chose to skip the jab.

          If it were a problem caused by Covid itself, then there would be an equal number from both camps suffering. That's not the case though.

          • +6

            @infinite: No it's not - heart complications were higher in unvaccinated people who caught covid than those who got the vaccine.

            • @Rick Sanchez: How many shots are you up to now? I hope you're on at least your sixth booster since covid is such a bad virus that it's causing a massive rise in heart problems.

              Whatever you do, keep believing the results from studies that are paid for by the companies making billions off of this. After all they're not the most litigated against industry in all of history. Oh wait, they are.

              • @glennski: At the moment yearly boosters are not recommended for under 65s, so I only have my original 2 boosters.

                https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/covid-19-vaccines/getting…

                • @gmatht:

                  my original 2 boosters.

                  The first 2 injections were of the 'Alpha recipe', for the Alpha "variant".
                  The extra 2 injections, after the first 2, were also of the 'Alpha recipe'.
                  For marketing purposes and to invoke confidence, it was called a "booster".

                  Plus, tens of millions of extra vials were ordered, in excess of Australia's population,
                  so there was pressure from the top, to use up the vials before the expiry date and to try to free up the refrigeration space.
                  School-children and young adults were pushed down that path, as too much was bought for AU's population.

                  So, the 'original booster' was only 'boosting' the same recipe, because the Alpha recipe was not to tackle the subsequent variants, eg. Delta, Omicron, etc.

          • +1

            @infinite: Do you have the Source for this fact?

            • +1

              @ddilrat: I believe part of the conspiracy is that all the medical research is kept under wraps, but luckily people in the know are spreading the truth though social media./s

          • +1
            • @GrueHunter: Great appeal to authority!

              Care to explain why excess deaths increased markedly a couple of months after the vaccine rollout in 2021 yet rates of covid cases in Australia were very low until Jan 2022 compared to most other countries?

      • +2

        AHPRA pretty much warned practitioners not to spread "misleading" information which included anecdotal observations. This is mostly an empty threat given that AHPRA can revoke licenses temporarily, but at least here in WA, SAT has the final say on whether the doctor can practice and unless it's gross malpractice (and I mean absolutely shockingly bad) then the doctor will keep their license.

        My wife, GP, sees around 6000 unique patients per year. During the covid rollout she observed about 6 cases of pericarditis, 1 myocarditis, 12 neurological (like Bell's palsy and other 'MS-like' illnesses) linked to the vaccine. Most of these serious side effects still impact the patients almost 4 years later. (This doesn't even take into consideration the huge number of people getting palpitations, just those who were diagnosed by cardiologists/neurologists.)

        When I look at the statistics about the vaccine related side effects I note that the reported incidences are not 1 in 1000 but closer to 1:20000. Which means there is probably a large discrepancy in reporting. But what do we know. You should listen to our 'tRusTed SciEntifiC AnD MediCAl AutHOrItiEs'.

    • +77

      Personal anecdote aside, 94% of Aussie adults had 2 vaccines. If there were truly mass side effects as your alluded to we would know about it, you cannot hide 20 million Australians have XXX issues.

        • +31

          Unfortunately when we are dealing with pseudo-religious topics like 'vaccine science'

          Are you implying immunisation science is faith based (Pseudo Religion) or are you attempting to say immunisation science is pseudoscience?

          Either way, that is honestly a hilariously bad take.

          • -1

            @youfnc: I'm saying it's something that people put a LOT of blind faith in.

            • +3

              @EightImmortals: Which bit is "blind"?

              Oh you mean all the trials that give us all the evidence and the publishing and the peer review and the more blind trials

              The stuff religion totally has as well

              They're definitely the same thing

              • @GrueHunter: So which peer-reviewed placebo controlled blind studies did you read before you took the shot?
                Please post links.

        • +14

          I've got a better conspiracy theory for antivaxxers…. what if you're listening to lies from an enemy state wanting to undermine our health?

            • -1
            • +4

              @EightImmortals: Are you kidding? Of the people I know in the US everyone knew of covid related deaths. And a lot of the people I know I'm Europe.
              Are you saying those videos of overcrowded hospitals in Italy are fake?

              • @Rick Sanchez: My question was did you personally (not on the TV) know of anyone dying or getting sick in 2020 in any greater numbers than any other year?

              • +1

                @Rick Sanchez:

                Of the people I know in the US everyone knew of covid related deaths.

                Could be other reasons they were labelled as covid related deaths. James Miller MD (in the USA) has written a short affidavit attesting to what he experienced during 2020/21/22.

                https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/the-price-of-truth-vs-dec…

                "Whilst we were sitting at the nurses station, a news article was seen that had been published in a local newspaper indicating that the hospital, specifically our ICU, was overrun with a flurry of COVID-19 patients which was causing difficulties for the hospital's function. This was obviously the opposite of the truth as we were currently sitting in the ICU and it was only approximately 30% full."

                "For example, one of my patients was an elderly lady who had been in an institution, nursing home, for quite some time and was dialysis dependent due to her kidney failure. The patient fell and arrived at the hospital with a brain bleed and she initially tested negative for COVID. Then, the hospital repeatedly tested her for COVID-19 over multiple days until they obtained a COVID-19 positive result. She shortly thereafter passed away due to her brain bleed and her death was labeled a COVID death. When I attempted to rectify the false cause of death I was prevented from doing so."

                • +1

                  @mrdean: US is a basket case of sensationalised, politicised, commercialised maniacs, in all areas.

                  Can people stop using the US as an example of any issues (actual or alleged) in Australia? We are not, and hopefully never will be, anything like them.

                  • +2

                    @Chandler: My father in law was in hospital with an aneurism when he contracted and recovered from Covid. He died three weeks later from an additional aneurism.

                    But upon death, still tested positive for Covid, so you can guess what they put as cause of death on the certificate. Yup, Covid. No mention of massive brain bleed.

                    Gotta pump up those numbers some how.

                    • +1

                      @randomvis: They must have pumped up those covid linked to anneurism studies too.

                      • +1

                        @Gehirn: He had a history of aneurism for 3 decades prior to covid. But sure, Covid.

                        • @randomvis: Yes covid has been seen to further inflammate and cause ruptures.

                          • +2

                            @Gehirn: He was already at deaths door with massive brain damage before he contracted covid.

                            You have convinced me, Doc. It was covid.

                            • @randomvis: Are you a doctor?

                              • +2

                                @Gehirn: Wife is, she was livid at the death certificate. She knew it was all politics.

                    • +1

                      @randomvis: I wouldn't be surprised if the misattribution of deaths to COVID is less "government agenda" and more "more COVID more $$$" given how much money governments were throwing around during COVID.

                      "Do we label this one as aneurysm or do we label it COVID and get some more funding… the patient did have COVID, and COVID could have contributed to their death, so technically not completely false…"

                • @mrdean: PCR tests were ruled 97% ineffective and unreliable.
                  All they were good for was to keep people locked down and to increase the manufactured number of people died for Covid.
                  https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/news-selections/wor…

                  • +2

                    @Mad Max: Do yourselves a favour a google Hal Turner before you waste your time reading this hot garbage.

                    It's beyond comical that you used Hal Turner as a source. Honestly, just great stuff.

                    • -2

                      @youfnc: Regardless of who reported this, it is a true fact. Mainstream media don't want to report this things because it contraddicts what they have been bainwashing people with for 2 years.

                      • +2

                        @Mad Max:

                        Regardless of who reported this

                        Come on. This is just too easy.

                      • +1

                        @Mad Max: mAinStrEaM mEdiA

                        I guess it's shorter than typing "any form of media, anywhere, ever, that says things that don't substantiate my deeply held belief that the reason I'm not wealthy and popular is that I'm being held back by a global conspiracy, and definitely not because of anything to do with my personality or capacity for evidence-based reasoning"

                    • @youfnc: This is the link for the court proceedings

                      https://www.oevento.pt/2020/11/16/tribunal-arrasa-eficacia-p…

                  • +1

                    @Mad Max: Please never remove this comment. People need to be reminded who they are debating.

                    • @youfnc: This is the link for the court proceedings

                      https://www.oevento.pt/2020/11/16/tribunal-arrasa-eficacia-p…

        • +2

          That would be too obvious

          Yes that would make all the lies too obvious…

      • +21

        Excess deaths in highly vaccinated countries are still sitting around 20%. Why is this? We don't know because it isn't being investigated.

        • +3

          Excess deaths are entirely attributable to SARS-CoV-2, and a starting to return to baseline. This has occurred because despite our best efforts, we haven't been able build perfect protection against it. This is the case for most vaccines, but especially for viruses that change rapidly.

          You wouldn't know about excess deaths, if it weren't for the scientists who are studying this stuff. These statistics don't come from Joe Rogan and his ilk, they come from the same experts you're claiming are hiding things.

          There's no conspiracy, the virus is orders of magnitude more dangerous than the vaccines, and any side effect of the vaccines is also a (higher) risk from the virus itself

          Again, there's no conspiracy, only uneducated people on the internet. Go spread disinformation elsewhere.

          • +1

            @bikebot: lols mate, even the msm are starting to fess up to it.

            https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/covid-vaccines-may-have-ca…

            It usually takes them more than 3 years for them to catch up but I guess the data set is so huge now they can't cover it up any more.

            • +2

              @EightImmortals: So much vagueness in that research.. these guys sum it up well: https://www.miragenews.com/linking-covid-vaccines-to-excess-…

              If msm and doctors say something thing which doesn't fit your narrative it's a coverup because "reasons" , but when they do hint at something similar you dont think it's an attempt to secure research funding or capitilize on paranoid readership?

              Considering most news thrives on doom and gloom does it surprise you to see more articles like yours now that short term damage can be limited to your audience?

              • @wyrmy: Did you actually read the ludicrous hypotheses put forward in that article?

                OK they weren't as silly as some of the other things put forward as an explanation for the excess deaths after 2020, like 'climate change' and 'gardening', but still. 'The return of the flu?' As if one prevalent virus would kindly take a back seat for the new kid on the block. Look up the official government numbers for the flu in 2020…are people really that gullible?

                And just like I didn't notice a 'pandemic' in 2020, I am seeing a lot of damage and deaths in people who took the shot. Not everyone, not by a long shot, but way too many. I know far too many people who regret taking the shots, including my own dad, far too many who are constantly sick now but were healthy before and far too many who are still in denial and are more than happy to blame 'anything' else. Granted the 'died suddenly's' we noticed in 2021/22 have started to slow down this year but are still happening in way too many young people.

                In the end it all comes down to beliefs and if people want to believe the covid narrative then that's on them. My concern is the amount of violence and discrimination issued on those who refused to believe. If it wasn't for that I wouldn't have nearly as vocal as I was/am on the topic.

                Anyway, I'm off to the coast for the weekend, the 'elephant in the room' memes kind of petered out last year so if people can't/wont figure it out by now I don't know what else to say. It's not like there's a shortage of evidence out there.

            • +1

              @EightImmortals: I love that you're so far gone that the Herald Sun counts as "mainstream"

      • +14

        I get what you are trying to say and agree that issues should be more obvious but even the ones that have had legitimate issues after the vaccine are immediately dismissed as making it up, as it being unrelated to the vaccine or that the same issue could have happened via covid. Lots of people are afraid to even speak about it for how they will get treated and doctors are reluctant to label things as being caused by the vaccine.

        A colleague of my wife, young guy in his 20s, got the vaccine, a week later he is in hospital with one of the heart issues (I forget which one), took nearly 2 years to get back to normal, no doctor will say it was because of the vaccine, just a coincidence they say.

        But with the AZ vaccine, get a blood clot and everyone believes you because the government said it was a thing.

        • +1

          as it being unrelated to the vaccine or that the same issue could have happened via covid

          So how do you know any issues post vax aren't unrelated or due to COVID?

          But with the AZ vaccine, get a blood clot and everyone believes you because the government said it was a thing.

          No, it's because the data shows a direct connection.

        • +2

          The same thing happened to me except in my case it was a black cat crossing my path. I never believed that myth before thinking it was only an old wive's tale. But sure enough 53 years 7 months later the doctor told me I had heart problems.

      • the issues don't sow up IN EVERYBODY

      • +4

        Seen this yesterday.
        https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/06/04/covid-vaccines-m…

        Covid vaccines may have helped fuel rise in excess deaths

        Experts call for more research into side effects and possible links to mortality rates

        They warned that side effects linked to the Covid vaccine had included ischaemic stroke, acute coronary syndrome and brain haemorrhage, cardiovascular diseases, coagulation, haemorrhages, gastrointestinal events and blood clotting.

      • +3

        If covid was the deadly threat it was claimed to be then why weren't we all stepping over bodies in the streets? You cannot hide that level of injury and mortality. /s

        I don't believe the side effects of covid vaccines are any worse than any other emergency medical authorised treatment. We knew we'd likely maim and kill people as part of those authorisations. That's why they exist in the first place: to take proper safety and efficacy testing out of the equation to speed deployment.

        If I was to argue for side effects my argument is that cardiac issues often take time to present. It's a silent killer, so if you're otherwise healthy then how would you even know there's a problem? Give it five or ten years and then we'll have the stats. That's how safe medications are tested, over years and years, carefully and cautiously.

        Finally and obviously, the same government that had zero problem running around like a headless chicken over covid is also the one that collects the statistics. Forget malice, these people are incompetent.

      • +2

        If there were truly mass side effects as your alluded to we would know about it, you cannot hide 20 million Australians have XXX issues.

        Back in 2022, the number of Australians who had reported severe adverse reactions to hospitals and doctors was already at a whopping 137,000 people (https://www.tga.gov.au/news/covid-19-vaccine-safety-reports/…).

        To the absolute disgust of the Australian senate and wider public, in 2023 the Federal Labor government ordered the TGA and Department of Health to stop tracking adverse reactions and stop publicly reporting them.

        The website that provided that up to date data was removed completely along with all the published data & no longer exists: https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/covid-19-…

        What's even worse now is that …….. and I'm not even joking about this………. To report adverse reactions from a Covid jab or booster and get medical help, the current Federal Government is advising Australians to call a hotline called "1300 Medicine" (1300 633 424) or visit "www.1300medicine.com.au". The people on that hotline are a mix of off-shore customer service operators and pharmacy students who advise on possible side-effects of PBS listed medicines. They will simply refer you to read some brochures published on the internet by the drug companies who currently produce the boosters available in Australia.

        • +6

          Back in 2022, the number of Australians who had reported severe adverse reactions to hospitals and doctors was already at a whopping 137,000 people (https://www.tga.gov.au/news/covid-19-vaccine-safety-reports/…)

          Here's a more up to date version:
          https://www.tga.gov.au/news/covid-19-vaccine-safety-reports/…

          You added severe to make it sound worse than it is

          From the above link:

          The most frequently reported side effects suspected to be associated with the vaccines include headache, muscle pain, fever, fatigue and nausea. Skin reactions at the site of the injection are also common and can include pain, swelling, redness and an itchy rash. These are recognised side effects of vaccination and are usually transient and mild.

          You can report directly to the TGA, to 1300medicine or your health professional. They say the 1300medicine line is staffed by registered pharmacists, are they lying or are you? They do also advise to call 000 if it is an emergency. Their role in this case is to take your report, they can also provide advice as a pharmacist. They do not provide medical assistance, if you need medical assistance do what you always do and you can even report the adverse reaction/s to the health professional you see.

          I'm not sure why you feel the need to misrepresent things.

      • +1

        For Pfizer at least, all batches were different.
        It recently came out that Pfizer employees had their own batch made (100% saline, being the implication)

        Given that this was a WORLDWIDE roll out of an EMERGENCY USE AUTHORISATION EXPERIMENTAL MRNA injection that had NO CLINICAL TRIALS, would it not have made sense to keep extremely close record keeping? I.e. who received which batch, and side effects? It's no conspiracy that many people had significant side effects, but unless you were unable to walk, no one cared for recording it.

        It's also no conspiracy that hospital statistic keeping were extremely laissez faire, because the Government would pay extra for patients with COVID. Plenty of instances of car crash victims coming in, basically dead already, getting PCR tested and dying from their accident wounds, but were logged as death WITH (not by) COVID.

        Oh, speaking of PCR - that test can find anything you want, given enough spin cycles. Recently found to be 97% ineffective in a European court.

        Not to mention that you were not considered 'vaccinated' until 2 weeks after your second dose - so anything that had a heart attack one day after their first pfizer jab could be chalked up as an unvaccinated death WITH Covid. They also didn't vaccinate palliative care patients who were on their way out, another great way to bump up unvaccinated deaths.

        Check out how many influenza deaths were recorded 2020/2021/2022. Next to none. All pushed to Covid
        Excess deaths mortality only jumped up after the 2021 vaccine roll out.

        Anyone remember all the TIk Tok videos of dancing health care workers, because the hospitals were so empty they had all the free time? But the media certainly scared us with "hospital bed capacity" without telling you that an arbitrary number of beds could be assigned by a hospital at any time, and this was not representative of every bed in the hospital being taken.

        • Oh, speaking of PCR - that test can find anything you want, given enough spin cycles. Recently found to be 97% ineffective in a European court

          Do you think Pcr was invented for/during covid?

          • @Ughhh: Unfortunately the inventor Kary Mullis died in 2019 - he was on record saying that you can find anything you want with these tests, if you spin enough cycles. I recall the protocol for the number of spins used to detect covid was raised at least once to encourage more positive test results. 45 cycles if I recall? Which is huge

            PCR is a wholly inappropriate test method for a virus. They just keep spinning cycles until they find a component loosely related to corona virus and go "yep, that's covid alright"

    • +5

      I get the point you are trying to make.

      Let me pose a hypothetical to you. What if you had cancer or some other life threatening illness and the only drug available was an experimental drug still in trials but you could gain access to it. Would you take it?

      Not that the covid vaccines were experimental. They are an mRNA vaccine which people don’t seem to grasp mRNA has been around for sometime and are the future for medicines

      • +17

        I might. The biggest problem that people have with it isn't that it as available, its more that they were forced or at least heavily coerced to take it.
        As for them being experimental, I'd consider them absolutely that. mRNA has been around for some time but not used in a mass distributed vaccine and not ever used to treat a novel coronavirus so it was a world first/unestablished in those two ways.
        They also required emergency use authorisation, because they hadn't gone through the proper long term checks yet. Another word for drugs that haven't yet been long term trialled and approved for mass use? Experimental.

        • +8

          Agree with you that people should not have been forced or coerced into taking it and even having to wear masks outside etc.

          With hundreds of millions of people having taken the covid vaccine, it’s fair to say it’s safe. The adverse events whilst very unfortunate, are within the levels of other drugs and we are now about 4 years on

          • +10

            @Dollar General: Too early to tell I think. Excess deaths in countries with high vaccination rates are still sitting at 20% above a baseline. Why isn’t this being investigated let alone discussed?
            Gives credence to the thought that those in power probably know more than we do and are afraid of the consequences should certain facts come to light.

            • +4

              @LanceVance: Data on excess deaths?

            • +3

              @LanceVance: Because if you knew anything about epidemiology, you would realise that the excess deaths was a trend and not something caused by vaccines…
              Sincerely, someone that took graduate level courses in epidemiology and public health

          • +3

            @Dollar General:

            The adverse events whilst very unfortunate, are within the levels of other drugs and we are now about 4 years on

            That's completely untrue.

            No drug released in Australia has ever even come close to recording the volume of adverse effects the Covid jab & it's boosters have recorded.

            Up until 2020, the drug or booster with the highest average rate of adverse reactions was typically always the seasonal flu shot, which over 90% of Australians would take. The total yearly adverse reactions for that was about 2000 people a year (https://www.tga.gov.au/pandemic-h1n1-influenza-vaccine-suspe…). The Covid jab resulted in 25 times that number of adverse reactions in 2021 and again in 2022 (https://www.tga.gov.au/news/covid-19-vaccine-safety-reports/…).

            The Covid jab and it's boosters have already gone down in medical history as being among the most damaging medicines ever publicly released & every year the data coming out about the severity of their on-going adverse reactions makes it even more damning. In just 2022, there were over 450 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis in children aged between 12 and 17 from just two of the available Covid boosters (https://www.tga.gov.au/news/covid-19-vaccine-safety-reports/…). Most of those kids will have those heart conditions for the rest of their lives. The total number of heart conditions caused by a booster that year is in the multiple thousands. To put that number in perspective, all opioid related overdoses leading to hospitalisation in Australia in 2022 was less than a thousand people.

            • +1

              @infinite:

              In just 2022, there were over 450 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis in children aged between 12 and 17 from just two of the available Covid boosters

              Covid vaccination is not recommended for children aged 12 to 17; so if they are taking it it is because they have pre-existing conditions (i.e. immunocompromised) that put them at higher risk if they catch coronavirus. Those pre-existing conditions could be contributing towards the adverse reaction, increasing it's severity, or causing/contributing to other complications. See also, xkcd:2618

              • +2

                @Chandler:

                Covid vaccination is not recommended for children aged 12 to 17

                It was however the advice to force them on kids from state government health authorities and from the medical boards that were demanding GP's tell people up until 2023.

                • @infinite: I'm unsure when the recommendations were changed, but they were never "to force them". I believe it was recommended early on, same as it was recommended for not-at-risk adults. And there were (that I can recall) never any restrictions placed (by the government) on children in regards to the covid vaccinations.

              • +5

                @Chandler:

                Covid vaccination is not recommended for children aged 12 to 17; so if they are taking it it is because they have pre-existing conditions (i.e. immunocompromised) that put them at higher risk if they catch coronavirus.

                Amazing how it shifted from "take a countermeasure to protect the immunocompromised (those who can't take the shot)", to "the immunocompromised should take the countermeasure to protect themselves."

                Very few questioned it. We're at the point now that it doesn't matter what illnesses people have, or even if women are pregnant, the advice generally is "take whatever is given."

                • -1

                  @mrdean:

                  Amazing how it shifted from "take a countermeasure to protect the immunocompromised (those who can't take the shot)", to "the immunocompromised should take the countermeasure to protect themselves."

                  (IMO) Now that the risk has eased due to the current variants being less deadly and less infectious, the need for the whole population to be vaccinated has reduced, to the point now that it is treated similarly to the flu shot.

                  Regarding that shift - remember that just because you're vaccinated doesn't mean you won't catch X, as we have seen with all the variants of covid. But if everyone is vaccinated, then the virus is much less likely to survive long enough in the population to mutate beyond the protection given by the vaccine.

                  With regards to covid, having a decent proportion of the population vaccinated means the virus spreads slower (since they're not getting as heavily infected) and thus protects those in the population who either can't have the vaccination or even if vaccinated are still at risk.

                  A vaccination is to your body like the West is to Ukraine. An arms dealer prepping it for an invasion by a foreign body (i.e. Russia a virus). It doesn't stop the virus from invading, and while it's there it may still damage the place, but your immune system has been given plans ahead of time on how to attack the virus, meaning that instead of having to gear itself up after infection, it's already got itself at least partly prepared. Especially important with a novel virus like covid.

                  the advice generally is "take whatever is given."

                  Advice regarding what? The covid vacine? What do you mean by "take whatever is given."?
                  I asked my GP about the covid vaccine (I think it was last year) and she said no need to worry about it since I'm not in any of the risk categories.

                  • +4

                    @Chandler:

                    It doesn't stop the virus from invading, and while it's there it may still damage the place, but your immune system has been given plans ahead of time on how to attack the virus, meaning that instead of having to gear itself up after infection, it's already got itself at least partly prepared.

                    Sadly, this oft-repeated belief is a limited & narrow view of what really happens when people get sick & how the immune system reacts. The mainstream admits it is highly complex & they don't know how it works. Sadly as well, no thought is given to the changes "vaccination" induces in the body, ie it CHANGES & forces the body to react in a specific way to all future infections. The first stages of an illness is crucial in mounting a response, vaccination bypasses this entirely & focuses on the endpoint of the natural process - the production of antibodies (which the mainstream also doesn't totally understand - they just see the production & ASSUME that is all that is needed to ward off illness, even though some people NEVER produce antibodies against certain illnesses & yet are still protected).

                    It is such a complex topic it would be impossible to give it justice on a forum such as this, but I urge you to THINK about the process from a wider perspective, not the generic belief you've reiterated.

                    • @mrdean: Whilst I agree with what you are saying, and that the view I presented may be incomplete - is it incorrect?

                      Also not all vaccinations are engineered - some are modified versions of viruses, some are even the literal virus, just being given to people under controlled circumstances (i.e. health, age, etc) which mean that it will not be as severe, but some form of protection from/for future infections will be achieved. Does your statement apply to these vaccinations also?

                      • +3

                        @Chandler: It applies to all vaccines.

                        One way to think about it is this: fever. It is a natural response when ill. There was a time when the mainstream recommended reducing it with drugs. Lately the mainstream seems to have reversed course & they now say to let it run its course, monitoring it in case it increases to a dangerous level.

                        Think of what a vaccine is engineered to do according to the mainstream & your view; supposedly train the immune system, give it a taste so that it reacts slightly with a fever or rash or other symptom to prepare it to meet the real illness. Note, I'm not saying I believe any of this, just re-iterating the mainstream view. So after the vaccine, if the person contracts an illness with fever as a symptom, the body responds with a MILD fever, probably less intense than it would have if not vaccinated. Is this a good thing though? That's the question. Because if a strong fever is a necessary response by the body to get over an illness, vaccines have now prevented this from happening because it has changed, or "trained" the body in how to respond. Can you see how this may not be a good thing? Instead of getting over an illness, it may in fact create a sub-clinical CHRONIC condition where the body is trying to mount a response, but it can't because it has been modified to respond in a certain way.

                        And I'm not even touching on all the other ingredients/excipients/contaminants/trace elements in a vaccine that the body has to unquestionable deal with when injected. That's a whole other discussion, as is the notion of "viruses" hijacking cells (personally I believe this is a major myth that also needs to be talked about).

Login or Join to leave a comment