Project Veritas Exposes Pfizer Executive Discussing Mutating Covid-19

[scott2000]

Since there are so many studies that have not come up with significant results that ivermectin is useful in treating covid, I'd guess that any real benefit, if it exists, must be extremely small.

Maybe they could also apply that thinking to the risks of taking it.
Something tells me one outweighs the other.
And I'm not talking about haphazardly including the 1 800 poison control party line calls that aren't relevant or even nefarious..

 

[crazydoc]

Maybe they could also apply that thinking to the risks of taking it.
Something tells me one outweighs the other.
And I'm not talking about haphazardly including the 1 800 poison control party line calls that aren't relevant or even nefarious..

Yes, the risk of taking ivermectin at recommended human doses is very small. The problem, as mentioned in a post above, is

At the doses and durations tested in these studies, ivermectin does not appear to be associated with serious adverse effects. However, a generally well-tolerated therapy that lacks efficacy can still be dangerous, particularly if it results in patients forgoing other interventions with proven efficacy, such as evidence-based COVID-19 treatments6 or vaccination against SARS-CoV-2.

So taking ivermectin, which has an unproven therapeutic effect, in place of other proven treatments would place a person at increased risk of a bad outcome. But if a person has no access to vaccination or effective therapeutic modalities, as in some third world areas, ivermectin may be better than nothing.

 

[57sputnik]

Early Ivermectin is assuredly a lot less risky than taking the advice of most doctors (and the WHO/CDC et al) and waiting for your lips to turn blue and reporting to the ER where they get a $3,000 bonus if they kill you. When you report to the ER with an O2 sat in the 80's the geniuses in the medical community will put an equipment bag on your head to transport you. Trust the Science®.

 

[57sputnik]

CIA Bribed Analysts To Change Lab-Leak Conclusions: 'Senior-Level' Whistleblower

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/...b-leak-conclusions-senior-level-whistleblower
A 'senior-level' CIA whistleblower has come forward to allege that the agency bribed analysts to change their opinion that Covid-19 most likely originated in a lab in Wuhan, China, according to the NY Post.

The whistleblower told House committee leaders that his agency ' tried to pay off six analysts who found SARS-CoV-2 likely originated in a Wuhan lab if they changed their position and said the virus jumped from animals to humans,' according to a Tuesday letter from the chairmen of two House subcommittees investigating the pandemic response and US intelligence, Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) and Mike Turner (R-OH).

"According to the whistleblower, at the end of its review, six of the seven members of the Team believed the intelligence and science were sufficient to make a low confidence assessment that COVID-19 originated from a laboratory in Wuhan, China," reads the letter from the House panel chairmen.

"The seventh member of the Team, who also happened to be the most senior, was the lone officer to believe COVID-19 originated through zoonosis. "The whistleblower further contends that to come to the eventual public determination of uncertainty, the other six members were given a significant monetary incentive to change their position," the letters continue, adding that the analysts were "experienced officers with significant scientific expertise."

So who else was paid to lie?
Answer: Just about everyone. Money and threats are the mother's milk of conspiracies.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration took action approving and authorizing for emergency use updated COVID-19 vaccines formulated to more closely target currently circulating variants and to provide better protection against serious consequences of COVID-19, including hospitalization and death.

Speaking of studies and testing for safety, are not the covid vaccines still only approved for "emergency" use?

An Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) is a mechanism to facilitate the availability and use of medical countermeasures, including vaccines, during public health emergencies, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic.

I thought the health emergency (pandemic) was over?

End of the Federal COVID-19 Public Health Emergency (PHE) Declaration​

Updated Sept. 12, 2023

• The federal COVID-19 PHE declaration ended on May 11, 2023.

If the PHE is over, why approve a new vaccine for "emergency" use?

JR

 

[57sputnik]

The Death Of Informed Consent

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/death-informed-consent
Here's what never happened in the hospital during COVID:

...a doctor sat down next to a patient and said,
"You have a choice.
We can give you Remdesivir, which killed 53% of the patients in an Ebola trial. It was so bad the trial had to be shut down. And you'll notice here in Remdesivir's fact sheet, it says, 'Not a lot of people have used Remdesivir. Serious and unexpected side effects may happen.'
Or we can give you ivermectin, a safe and effective drug that's been successfully used for decades, and send you home. Which do you prefer?"

The reason that conversation never happened is that it would have cost the hospital too much money. If the hospital gave you ivermectin and sent you home, the federal government paid the hospital $3,200. If the hospital gave you Remdesivir, the federal government paid the entire hospital bill, plus a 20% bonus. So the hospital executives' choice was to receive $3,200 or $500,000, which was the average hospital bill. No contest. Patients were going to get Remdesivir — whether they wanted it or not.

I asked Michael Hamilton how it's possible to give Remdesivir to patients without them knowing. Hamilton is a lawyer for several families who are suing California hospitals for the murder of their loved ones, and he's heard thousands of victims' stories.

"They would lie right to your face," he said.
"You'd tell the nurse that you didn't want Remdesivir and she'd say, 'Fine. But you're a bit dehydrated, so let's get some fluids in you.' And she'd hook up the IV, but it wasn't fluids. It was Remdesivir."

Hamilton told me that another favored tactic was to knock out patients with sedatives like morphine and fentanyl. While they lay there in a stupor, they were injected with Remdesivir.

Michael Hamilton told me the fate of his friend who was a nurse, hospitalized in the place where she had worked for 26 years. When she refused ventilation, the doctor shrieked,

"You're refusing medical advice! Now your insurance company won't pay your hospital bill when you die! Do you want to bankrupt your family? Do you? Do you?" The nurse panicked, and to protect her family, she "consented."

Two days later, she died.

The hospitals, "doctors" and clinicians who do this are murderers...

 

[JohnRoberts]

One of Novak Djokovic’s plays during his 2023 US Open victory was ironically named the “Moderna Shot of the Day.”

Amusing joke... "All those players who took their covid shots are rolling over in their graves"

JR

 

[Tubetec]

Reminds me much of Justin Truedo and how he felt so good after getting the vax , thats also the reason the Kiwi prime minister hung up her boots ,she realised she'd got taken for a ride over covid, at least she had some moral compass as to fold her cards outright ,the rest of the liars look like they want to go down slow .

The isolation of covid seems to me to have caused far greater harm than the organism itself .the consequeces of lockdown bearing a striking harm on peoples abillity to trust,get out and about and pass the time of day in their neighbourhood ,as if in cities that wasnt alway a problem anyway

 

[Tubetec]

Covid recluse syndrome ,what pill will they invent for that ?

Double your dose, if that doesnt work we'll hot swap you onto somthing else,
half the westernised planet are zonked out on scripted meds and a medical insurance model that chases its own tail for profit

 

[volker]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629623000796

We examine the relationship between cognitive ability and prompt COVID-19 vaccination using individual-level data on more than 700,000 individuals in Sweden. We find a strong positive association between cognitive ability and swift vaccination, which remains even after controlling for confounding variables with a twin-design. The results suggest that the complexity of the vaccination decision may make it difficult for individuals with lower cognitive abilities to understand the benefits of vaccination.

Guess we'll have to use shorter sentences in this thread from now on.

 

[scott2000]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629623000796




Guess we'll have to use shorter sentences in this thread from now on.

"The study population consists of all men and women who enlisted for military service in Sweden between 1979 and 1997. During this period, enlistment was mandatory for men the year they turned 18 or 19."

So take a bunch of kids who enlisted and use those test scores from that time as an indicator of how intelligent they are decades later? Tell me I'm reading it wrong. I can handle it. I need it actually.

"We match information on their COVID-19 vaccinations with scores on a cognitive ability test, capturing general intelligence (Mårdberg and Carlstedt 1998), that was taken at about 18 years of age as part of the Swedish military enlistment procedure, which was mandatory for men and voluntary for women."

 

[AnalogPackrat]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629623000796




Guess we'll have to use shorter sentences in this thread from now on.

LOL. Keep digging. The smug elitism is off the scale. BS and MS in computer engineering here. 29 years in high tech. Happily retired after a successful career full of complex decision-making. Not interested in being a test subject for experimental and unnecessary injections.

BTW, my dog is usually quite obedient. Does that mean his intelligence is on par with similarly obedient humans?

 

[AnalogPackrat]

"The study population consists of all men and women who enlisted for military service in Sweden between 1979 and 1997. During this period, enlistment was mandatory for men the year they turned 18 or 19."

So take a bunch of kids who enlisted and use those test scores from that time as an indicator of how intelligent they are decades later? Tell me I'm reading it wrong. I can handle it. I need it actually.

Or that military service as a young adult tends to make one more compliant/obedient to authority later in life. Or that the monocultural countries (which Sweden was during the test period) produce more obedient citizens (Japan and South Korea are two other examples).

"We match information on their COVID-19 vaccinations with scores on a cognitive ability test, capturing general intelligence (Mårdberg and Carlstedt 1998), that was taken at about 18 years of age as part of the Swedish military enlistment procedure, which was mandatory for men and voluntary for women."

 

[scott2000]

Or that military service as a young adult tends to make one more compliant/obedient to authority later in life

Yeah I saw that elephant too but it wasn't in the limitations of the study so....

also confusing is seeing a test cited from 1998 when the subjects were from 79-97
Appears there were some different named tests and or revisions and different scales applied to improve precision among other things

 

[jabe]

So take a bunch of kids who enlisted and use those test scores from that time as an indicator of how intelligent they are decades later? Tell me I'm reading it wrong.

For what it's worth, section 2.1 states: "The test scores have also been shown to be highly correlated with scores on a similar cognitive ability test taken at the age of 50–65 (Rönnlund et al., 2015), suggesting that it is a good predictor of intelligence throughout adulthood." It links to a study titled "Interindividual differences in general cognitive ability from age 18 to age 65 years are extremely stable and strongly associated with working memory capacity".

 

[scott2000]

For what it's worth, section 2.1 states: "The test scores have also been shown to be highly correlated with scores on a similar cognitive ability test taken at the age of 50–65 (Rönnlund et al., 2015), suggesting that it is a good predictor of intelligence throughout adulthood." It links to a study titled "Interindividual differences in general cognitive ability from age 18 to age 65 years are extremely stable and strongly associated with working memory capacity".

yeah there's a few other gymnastics in there as well... It still doesn't take away from the original method used.
My decision making has been formed from decades of learning and experience regardless of some test I may have considered being forced into taking when I was 18.

Hospital tried taking my appendix..Just about forced me to with threats. Told them about my choice to try the antibiotic route and they made me sign a waver. Warned me that my appendicolith would cause rupture.
I quit drinking, ate healthy, took herbs....
follow up scan....totally healthy appendix with no issues whatsoever...no stone,....

Stupid risk? Maybe....
We'll see once they figure out what the appendix actually does...and why it keeps wanting to hang around..
Maybe, appears, could, seems....not good enough for some things to me.
Not against taking it out to save my life though...
I trust them enough to fill me with titanium so that's no biggie...

 

[AnalogPackrat]

For what it's worth, section 2.1 states: "The test scores have also been shown to be highly correlated with scores on a similar cognitive ability test taken at the age of 50–65 (Rönnlund et al., 2015), suggesting that it is a good predictor of intelligence throughout adulthood." It links to a study titled "Interindividual differences in general cognitive ability from age 18 to age 65 years are extremely stable and strongly associated with working memory capacity".

Having worked with many highly intelligent (in the sense of IQ, academic performance, etc.) people in my career I can assure you that these common measures of intelligence do not include common sense, pragmatism, or experiential learning (e.g. judging information, reading people, situational awareness, basic self-preservation, etc.). Good luck running the world based on idealism and "book-smarts." Reality will eat your lunch.

 

[volker]

"The study population consists of all men and women who enlisted for military service in Sweden between 1979 and 1997. During this period, enlistment was mandatory for men the year they turned 18 or 19."

So take a bunch of kids who enlisted and use those test scores from that time as an indicator of how intelligent they are decades later? Tell me I'm reading it wrong. I can handle it. I need it actually.

"We match information on their COVID-19 vaccinations with scores on a cognitive ability test, capturing general intelligence (Mårdberg and Carlstedt 1998), that was taken at about 18 years of age as part of the Swedish military enlistment procedure, which was mandatory for men and voluntary for women."

Intelligence doesn't vary too much over the lifespan, it starts decreasing at old age.

LOL. Keep digging. The smug elitism is off the scale. BS and MS in computer engineering here. 29 years in high tech. Happily retired after a successful career full of complex decision-making. Not interested in being a test subject for experimental and unnecessary injections.

BTW, my dog is usually quite obedient. Does that mean his intelligence is on par with similarly obedient humans?

Not digging for anything, just having fun. Which means I'm done with this now, I've had my laugh.
And no, it does not mean that. For all your credentials you like to list all the time... have you never come across the concept of necessity and sufficiency? Also why are you extrapolating to general obedience, when the study is only about a particular vaccine compliance?

Or that military service as a young adult tends to make one more compliant/obedient to authority later in life. Or that the monocultural countries (which Sweden was during the test period) produce more obedient citizens (Japan and South Korea are two other examples).

That might lift the baseline compliance for everyone, so doesn't matter in terms of the correlation studied here. If anything, wouldn't you in general expect smarter people to be less blindly obedient, influenced by authority and more critical?

Having worked with many highly intelligent (in the sense of IQ, academic performance, etc.) people in my career I can assure you that these common measures of intelligence do not include common sense, pragmatism, or experiential learning (e.g. judging information, reading people, situational awareness, basic self-preservation, etc.). Good luck running the world based on idealism and "book-smarts." Reality will eat your lunch.

Nobody will dispute that, but it's a diversion from what is in the study and does not matter in that context.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Intelligence doesn't vary too much over the lifespan, it starts decreasing at old age.

I feel like I am getting dumber every day, especially after seeing studies like this.

The good news is that it is all relative.

JR

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Intelligence doesn't vary too much over the lifespan, it starts decreasing at old age.


Not digging for anything, just having fun. Which means I'm done with this now, I've had my laugh.
And no, it does not mean that. For all your credentials you like to list all the time... have you never come across the concept of necessity and sufficiency?

Of course. And a fair bit of bad "science," too.

Also why are you extrapolating to general obedience, when the study is only about a particular vaccine compliance?

Because anyone who paid attention during the pandemic saw fear being used to successfully manipulate a large fraction of the population of "free" countries, not just to take unproven treatment, but to completely alter their lives in a very general sense.

That might lift the baseline compliance for everyone, so doesn't matter in terms of the correlation studied here.

Since the study only includes those with military service there's no way to tell because they have no control for it.

If anything, wouldn't you in general expect smarter people to be less blindly obedient, influenced by authority and more critical?

"Smarter" people are those with the untested capabilities I listed. They may well test with lower IQ than what this study (and apparently you) call "intelligence." Having worked with a lot of highly educated science, math, and engineering folks, the majority tend toward obedience or going along to get along which puts them in the obedient group. Maybe 10-20% are actually comfortable enough with their own critical evaluation of situations and have the willpower to publicly act on it in my experience. The Covid pandemic made this clear. Very few people will stand up to authority when it comes down to it.

Nobody will dispute that, but it's a diversion from what is in the study and does not matter in that context.

It's key to it.