The Dam Is Starting To Break. MSM Now Forced To Talk About VAIDS. Tucker Carlson - Alarming Research About The Covid Vaccines Is Coming Out

knickslions

Well-Known Member
Feb 2, 2005
1,232
1,139
1
Didn't you know? @knickslions IS science. Only an arrogant narrow minded fool would spout off on a video/paper they didn't even read.

He believes every word of highly conflicted scientists and captured govt goons/journals but all of the experts who disagree with them are crazy. Only the folks who stand to make a ton of $$$ from big pharma, or who have a cushy job waiting for them in big pharma after they leave the govt, can be believed. Everyone else is a charlatan.

I guess Geert Vanden Bossche was also wrong when he predicted this exact thing happening (being vaccinated will interfere with the natural immune system):

(Geert Vanden Bossche presentation with Dr. McCullough explaining how vaccinated folks will have trouble with new variants)

@knickslions has already read through all of the below citations and debunked them.

The citations listed in this letter to the editor published recently in the Virology Journal show a mountain of evidence against these shots and makes a clear cut case for VAIDS.


References​

1. Nordström P, Ballin M, Nordström A. Risk of infection, hospitalisation, and death up to 9 months after a second dose of COVID-19 vaccine: a retrospective, total population cohort study in Sweden. Lancet. 2022;399:814–823. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00089-7. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
2. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Interim public health considerations for the provision of additional COVID-19 vaccine doses. https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publi...ealth-considerations-additional-vaccine-doses. Accessed 4 May 2022.
3. Mallapaty S. Fourth dose of COVID vaccine offers only slight boost against Omicron infection. Nature. 2022 doi: 10.1038/D41586-022-00486-9. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
4. Krienke C, Kolb L, Diken E, Streuber M, Kirchhoff S, Bukur T, et al. A noninflammatory mRNA vaccine for treatment of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. Science. 2021;371:145–153. doi: 10.1126/science.aay3638. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
5. Bansal S, Perincheri S, Fleming T, Poulson C, Tiffany B, Bremner RM, et al. Cutting edge: circulating exosomes with COVID spike protein are induced by BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) vaccination prior to development of antibodies: a novel mechanism for immune activation by mRNA vaccines. J Immunol. 2021;207:2405–2410. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.2100637. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
6. BNT162b2 Module 2.4. Nonclinical Overview. FDA-CBER-2021-4379-0000681 JW-v-HHS-prod-3-02418.pdf (judicialwatch.org) Access 6 May 2022.
7. Ndeupen S, Qin Z, Jacobsen S, Bouteau A, Estanbouli H, Igyártó BZ. The mRNA-LNP platform’s lipid nanoparticle component used in preclinical vaccine studies is highly inflammatory. Science. 2021;24:103479. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2021.103479. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
8. Yamamoto K. Risk of heparinoid use in cosmetics and moisturizers in individuals vaccinated against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus. Thromb J. 2021 doi: 10.1186/s12959-021-00320-8. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
9. Lei Y, Zhang J, Schiavon CR, He M, Chen L, Shen H, et al. SARS-CoV-2 spike protein impairs endothelial function via downregulation of ACE 2. Circ Res. 2021;128:1323–1326. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.121.318902. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
10. Liu Y, Soh WT, Kishikawa JI, Hirose M, Nakayama EE, Li S, et al. An infectivity-enhancing site on the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein targeted by antibodies. Cell. 2021;184:3452–66.e18. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2021.05.032. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
11. Cho A, Muecksch F, Schaefer-Babajew D, Wang Z, Finkin S, Gaebler C, et al. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain antibody evolution after mRNA vaccination. Nature. 2021;600:517–522. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-04060-7. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
12. Desai HD, Sharma K, Shah A, Patoliya J, Patil A, Hooshanginezhad Z, et al. Can SARS-CoV-2 vaccine increase the risk of reactivation of Varicella zoster. Systematic review. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021;20:3350–3361. doi: 10.1111/jocd.14521. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
13. Barda N, Dagan N, Ben-Shlomo Y, Kepten E, Waxman J, Ohana R, et al. Safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 v in a nationwide setting. N Engl J Med. 2021;385:1078–1090. doi: 10.1056/NEJMOA2110475/SUPPL_FILE/NEJMOA2110475_DISCLOSURES.PDF. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
14. Seneff S, Nigh G, Kyriakopoulos AM, McCullough PA. Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: the role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs. Food Chem Toxicol. 2022;164:113008. doi: 10.1016/J.FCT.2022.113008. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
15. Lee EJ, Cines DB, Gernsheimer T, Kessler C, Michel M, Tarantino MD, et al. Thrombocytopenia following Pfizer and Moderna SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Am J Hematol. 2021;96:534–537. doi: 10.1002/AJH.26132. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
16. Yamamoto K. Five important preventive measures against the exacerbation of coronavirus disease. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2021;53:358–359. doi: 10.5114/ait.2021.108581. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
17. Yamamoto K. Risk of propofol use for sedation in COVID-19 patient. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2020;52:354–355. doi: 10.5114/ait.2020.100477. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
18. Gundry SR. Observational findings of PULS cardiac test findings for inflammatory markers in patients receiving mRNA vaccines. Circulation. 2021;144(suppl_1):A10712–A10712. doi: 10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
19. Lai FTT, Li X, Peng K, Huang L, Ip P, Tong X, et al. Carditis After COVID-19 vaccination with a messenger RNA vaccine and an inactivated virus vaccine: a case-control study. Ann Intern Med. 2022;175:362–370. doi: 10.7326/M21-3700. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
You keep posting the same shit over and over. There are thousands of studies that contradict these few hacks.

Geert has an agenda as do most of the articles you post. His theories are not correct and yes they are therioes. Here is an impartial article about his theories

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: maypole

Alphalion75

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Oct 24, 2001
17,510
5,871
1
Alpharetta, GA
@Alphalion75 How did the "fact checks" work out re: 'russia gate' or 'the hunter biden laptop story is russian disinfo' or 'there are no US funded biolabs in Ukraine' stories? At this point anyone who still believes these msm narrative protectors aka fact checkers hasn't been paying attention the last several years and deserves to be ridiculed. The MSM is broken and captured. Their censorship of key information has cost the world dearly.

vkvBX5i.png
My friend. Simply presenting various views.
 

Alphalion75

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Oct 24, 2001
17,510
5,871
1
Alpharetta, GA
I'm pretty sure that's BS.

Watch this:

Just another view my friend.
 

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
19,862
25,478
1
2020evidence.org
My friend. Simply presenting various views.
Not really. You’re presenting propaganda from an obviously corrupt entity (the mainstream media) about a matter that involves life and death.

All the fact check did was quote “experts” who said studies show these shots don’t harm your immune system but they didn’t cite a single one or even provide the name of a single study. They simply differed to authority figures.

I’m going to ask this question to you and @knickslions as I’m sincerely curious, if these shots are as safe and effective as we’re being told why did the FDA and Pfizer fight in court to keep pfizer’s trial data hidden for 75 yrs? How is that not a major red flag for you? It reeks.
 

CoastGuard2018

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2017
1,554
2,741
1
Not really. You’re presenting propaganda from an obviously corrupt entity (the mainstream media) about a matter that involves life and death.

All the fact check did was quote “experts” who said studies show these shots don’t harm your immune system but they didn’t cite a single one or even provide the name of a single study. They simply differed to authority figures.

I’m going to ask this question to you and @knickslions as I’m sincerely curious, if these shots are as safe and effective as we’re being told why did the FDA and Pfizer fight in court to keep pfizer’s trial data hidden for 75 yrs? How is that not a major red flag for you? It reeks.
There are some definite red flags and too much smoke to merely dismiss it out of hand. Some people do that for political reasons in my estimation as well as wishfulness. I think there are extremists on both sides. I had 3 shots personally because of the nature of the work I now do coupled with some other factors and will continue to monitor the data and and articles. Like anything else I think the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle. My wife didn’t get the vaccines but is not anti vax she just didn’t feel comfortable getting it based on her health, age and analysis of the situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alphalion75

1Hammers1

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2014
710
1,345
1
One of the things many people state really bothers me. #1. If you are old and weak you are the person who needs to get the cv-19 shot. #2 If someone who is old and weak has a reaction to the cv-19 wouldn't it be more harmful to them , than a younger person. #3 why even take the chance ? The shot doesn't work.
It's time to stop mandates. The recession has been caused by the mandates. Enough people have been harmed already. Call it off.
 

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
19,862
25,478
1
2020evidence.org
One of the things many people state really bothers me. #1. If you are old and weak you are the person who needs to get the cv-19 shot. #2 If someone who is old and weak has a reaction to the cv-19 wouldn't it be more harmful to them , than a younger person. #3 why even take the chance ? The shot doesn't work.
It's time to stop mandates. The recession has been caused by the mandates. Enough people have been harmed already. Call it off.
This ^^. Whenever there is risk there should be choice, not mandates which is batshit crazy.

Reminder, multiple studies looking at pfizers phase III trial data show these shots were associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events:


Abstract​

Introduction: In 2020, prior to COVID-19 vaccine rollout, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations and Brighton Collaboration created a priority list, endorsed by the World Health Organization, of potential adverse events relevant to COVID-19 vaccines. We leveraged the Brighton Collaboration list to evaluate serious adverse events of special interest observed in phase III randomized trials of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

Methods: Secondary analysis of serious adverse events reported in the placebo-controlled, phase III randomized clinical trials of Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (NCT04368728 and NCT04470427), focusing analysis on potential adverse events of special interest identified by the Brighton Collaboration.

Results: Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events of special interest, with an absolute risk increase of 10.1 and 15.1 per 10,000 vaccinated over placebo baselines of 17.6 and 42.2 (95% CI -0.4 to 20.6 and -3.6 to 33.8), respectively. Combined, the mRNA vaccines were associated with an absolute risk increase of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 (95% CI 2.1 to 22.9). The excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest surpassed the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group in both Pfizer and Moderna trials (2.3 and 6.4 per 10,000 participants, respectively).

Discussion: The excess risk of serious adverse events found in our study points to the need for formal harm-benefit analyses, particularly those that are stratified according to risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes such as hospitalization or death.
==========================================================================
This paper corroborates the below one which also looked at the data from the "gold standard" double blind trials:

https://www.scivisionpub.com/pdfs/u...nalyzed-using-the-proper-scientific--1811.pdf
(US COVID-19 Vaccines Proven to Cause More Harm than Good Based on Pivotal Clinical Trial Data Analyzed Using the Proper Scientific Endpoint, “All Cause Severe Morbidity/Mortality”)
 

john4psu

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2003
11,359
7,932
1
Covid was the Trojan Horse for the death jabs to reduce the world's population. True "vaccines" that actually worked for far, far, far more lethal and deadly viruses were never forced on mankind as were the Covid jabs.

Ask yourself, why?

J6zLgs7.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeR0206

Alphalion75

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Oct 24, 2001
17,510
5,871
1
Alpharetta, GA
Not really. You’re presenting propaganda from an obviously corrupt entity (the mainstream media) about a matter that involves life and death.

All the fact check did was quote “experts” who said studies show these shots don’t harm your immune system but they didn’t cite a single one or even provide the name of a single study. They simply differed to authority figures.

I’m going to ask this question to you and @knickslions as I’m sincerely curious, if these shots are as safe and effective as we’re being told why did the FDA and Pfizer fight in court to keep pfizer’s trial data hidden for 75 yrs? How is that not a major red flag for you? It reeks.
Ok, fair enough. You can call it what you like my friend. That's what's so great about this country. We can share our views and opinions without persecution.
 

Alphalion75

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Oct 24, 2001
17,510
5,871
1
Alpharetta, GA
Not really. You’re presenting propaganda from an obviously corrupt entity (the mainstream media) about a matter that involves life and death.

All the fact check did was quote “experts” who said studies show these shots don’t harm your immune system but they didn’t cite a single one or even provide the name of a single study. They simply differed to authority figures.

I’m going to ask this question to you and @knickslions as I’m sincerely curious, if these shots are as safe and effective as we’re being told why did the FDA and Pfizer fight in court to keep pfizer’s trial data hidden for 75 yrs? How is that not a major red flag for you? It reeks.
The FDA was not fighting a case to keep the trial data hidden. They objected to the rate of releasing the data. The FDA intended to release the data at the rate that is typically required by an FOIA request. And because the number of pages includes 329,000 pages it would take a lengthy time to release all the data at the typical FOIA rate of 500 pages per month. I certainly understand the concern you have about this but it's not clear to me that the FDA and Pfizer have any criminal intent here. They have never refused to produce the data. But they have been ordered to release all 329,000 pages of the data this year so we shall see if they had anything to hide. I'll leave an open mind on this.
 
Last edited: