intothatgoodnight
. . .
If "all" of her family, and "all" of your family "have been vaxxed," who is left to be "relied" upon, and considered "trusted" family?
intothegoodnight
CORONA CV19 Injections Will Cause Massive Death – Dr. Elizabeth Eads
- Thread starter Hacker
- Start date
intothegoodnight
intothatgoodnight
. . .
You neglected a possibility of **some** receiving a placebo/saline shot.
I am of the opinion that the missing "trial testing phase" is actually occurring in the field, live, unrealized by those receiving the shot. Unique lot numbers, per vial, provide a possible mechanism to track which (specific?) vial ingredients went to which shot recipients. Only the shot manufacturers could decode the lot numbering versus actual (trial testing phase) vial ingredient reality.
If I, and others, have thought of this possible "field testing scenario," you can bet that the shot manufacturers have ALSO (previously) thought about this potential shot-tracking/ingredient mechanism, too.
Dastardly, if true (no informed consent) - but not rocket-science - just statistics.
intothegoodnight
Try searching on CDC and NIH websites. If you are just becoming engaged in this topic, you've got a huge job in front of you.
45 min. In the OP is all that is needed, if you can get through it.
Profit of Doom
Dismember
Tried Wayback?
Profit of Doom
Dismember
I thought the protocol was always go home and turn blue?
et2
Has No Life - Lives on TB
intothatgoodnight
. . .
1) Hospitals are paid HANDSOMELY by the Feds for each COVID LABELED death.
2) The Feds, via the CDC's intentional "misguidance," insisted that the PCR test for COVID was accurate/valid in determining whether a patient has COVID.
3) The Feds, via yet more of the CDC's intentional "misguidance," proscribed a specific hospital treatment protocol for all patients that were misdiagnosed as having COVID.
4) The MSM kicked the fear campaign into high gear using purposefully intended false death data/interpretations/stats, while LOUDLY denigrating alternative COVID treatment protocols, with the overall intention of instilling a state of utter fear and emotionally charged irrational choices/misunderstandings into J6P's universe/stampede the herd.
5) Tip-of-the-spear front-line medical personnel were reluctant to buck the **official** Fed/CDC line, for fear of losing their licensing and liability insurability, appearing "professionally" incompetent in the eyes of their peers, jeopardizing their future advancement/employability/retirement plans. (more FEAR as the motivation mechanism)
6) Big pharma was most certainly on a profit-driven ROLL, no matter how one looked at the situation - many palms were greased, both legitimately (legally via treatment/jab payout/spiffs), and illegitimately.
Not mentioned above is the whole conspiracy idea of the jab being a depopulation mechanism - which is a whole 'nuther discussion.
intothegoodnight
Last edited:
Hfcomms
EN66iq
Denninger went into the info and the lot numbers and verified some of the claims that he thought the tin foil hat brigade was making. I'll just do a few snips and then give a link as it's an in-depth read.
/snip
2021-11-02 07:40 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 18829 references
Uh, That's Not A Conspiracy Theory
There is an article floating around from The Expose that makes an explosive claim: There is a wildly statistically-significant skew in the death rate from Covid-19 vaccines by lot number.
What originally got my attention was the tinfoil hat crowd screaming about lots being intentionally distributed to certain people to kill them -- in other words certain Covid-19 vaccine lots were for all intents and purposes poisoned. That was wildly unlikely so I set out to disprove it and apply some broom handles to the tinfoil hatters heads. What I found, however, was both interesting and deeply disturbing.
Lots are quite large, especially when you're dealing with 200 million people and 400 million doses. Assuming the lots are not preferentially assigned to certain cohorts (e.g. one goes to all nursing homes, etc) adverse reactions should thus be evenly distributed between lots; if they're not one of these things is almost-certainly true:
What the actual **** is going on here? You're going to try to tell me that the CDC, NIH and FDA don't know about this? I can suck this data into a database, run 30 seconds of queries against it and instantly identify a wildly-elevated death and hazard rate associated with certain lot numbers when the distribution of those associations should be reasonably-even, or at least something close to it, across all the lots produced and used? Then I look to try to find the obvious potential "clean" explanation (the higher death rate lot could have gone into older people) and it's simply not there when one looks at all adverse event reports. I have Moderna lots with the same average age of persons who died but ten times times the number of associated deaths.
Then I look at reported date of death and.... its reasonably close to an even distribution. So no, it wasn't all those old people getting killed at once in the first month. So much for that attempted explanation.
Oh if you're interested the nastiest lot was literally everywhere in terms of states reporting adverse events against it; no, they didn't concentrate them in one state or region either.
/snip
In other words the best-fit hypothesis is that causing the body to produce part of a pathogen when that part has pathological capacity (as we know is the case for the spike) cannot be controlled adequately through commercial manufacturing process at-scale. This means that no vector-based, irrespective of how (e.g. viral vector or mRNA), not-directly-infused coronavirus jab will ever have an acceptable safety profile because some lots will be "hot" and harm crazy percentages of those they're given to with no way to know in advance. The basic premise used here -- to have the body produce the agent the immune system identifies rather than directly introduce it where you can control the quantity, is a failure.
The entire premise of calling something that does this a "vaccine" is bogus and in the context of a coronavirus this may never be able to be done safely.
Something is very wrong here folks and the people running VAERS either aren't looking on purpose, know damn well its happening and are saying nothing about it on purpose -- never mind segregating the data in such a fashion that casual perusal of their downloads won't find it -- or saw it immediately and suppressed reporting on purpose.
If these firms were not immune from civil and even criminal prosecution as a result of what Biden and Trump did the plaintiff's bar would have been crawling up *******s months ago.
/snip
/snip
2021-11-02 07:40 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 18829 references
Uh, That's Not A Conspiracy Theory
There is an article floating around from The Expose that makes an explosive claim: There is a wildly statistically-significant skew in the death rate from Covid-19 vaccines by lot number.
What originally got my attention was the tinfoil hat crowd screaming about lots being intentionally distributed to certain people to kill them -- in other words certain Covid-19 vaccine lots were for all intents and purposes poisoned. That was wildly unlikely so I set out to disprove it and apply some broom handles to the tinfoil hatters heads. What I found, however, was both interesting and deeply disturbing.
Lots are quite large, especially when you're dealing with 200 million people and 400 million doses. Assuming the lots are not preferentially assigned to certain cohorts (e.g. one goes to all nursing homes, etc) adverse reactions should thus be evenly distributed between lots; if they're not one of these things is almost-certainly true:
- There is a serious manufacturing quality problem or you produced something without understanding how it would work in the body and thus failed to control for something you had to in order to wind up with reproduceable results. That is, some lots are ok, others are contaminated, have too much or too little of the active ingredient in them, some produce wildly more spike-protein than others in the body when injected, etc.
OR
- Much worse, the lots are intentionally segregated to produce different results. This implies some sort of nefarious intent such as killing people on a differential basis or that the manufacturers are running unsanctioned experiments on a mass basis among the population at-large, since they know what is in each lot and intentionallyvaried the contents.
OR
- Perhaps worst of all, reports are now being intentionally suppressed, the injury and death rate hasn't changed and there are lots with one of the two above problems but it is being intentionally not reported, having been detected almost-instantly and health providers were directed to not report anything serious (e.g. death) associated with the jabs.
What the actual **** is going on here? You're going to try to tell me that the CDC, NIH and FDA don't know about this? I can suck this data into a database, run 30 seconds of queries against it and instantly identify a wildly-elevated death and hazard rate associated with certain lot numbers when the distribution of those associations should be reasonably-even, or at least something close to it, across all the lots produced and used? Then I look to try to find the obvious potential "clean" explanation (the higher death rate lot could have gone into older people) and it's simply not there when one looks at all adverse event reports. I have Moderna lots with the same average age of persons who died but ten times times the number of associated deaths.
Then I look at reported date of death and.... its reasonably close to an even distribution. So no, it wasn't all those old people getting killed at once in the first month. So much for that attempted explanation.
Oh if you're interested the nastiest lot was literally everywhere in terms of states reporting adverse events against it; no, they didn't concentrate them in one state or region either.
/snip
In other words the best-fit hypothesis is that causing the body to produce part of a pathogen when that part has pathological capacity (as we know is the case for the spike) cannot be controlled adequately through commercial manufacturing process at-scale. This means that no vector-based, irrespective of how (e.g. viral vector or mRNA), not-directly-infused coronavirus jab will ever have an acceptable safety profile because some lots will be "hot" and harm crazy percentages of those they're given to with no way to know in advance. The basic premise used here -- to have the body produce the agent the immune system identifies rather than directly introduce it where you can control the quantity, is a failure.
The entire premise of calling something that does this a "vaccine" is bogus and in the context of a coronavirus this may never be able to be done safely.
Something is very wrong here folks and the people running VAERS either aren't looking on purpose, know damn well its happening and are saying nothing about it on purpose -- never mind segregating the data in such a fashion that casual perusal of their downloads won't find it -- or saw it immediately and suppressed reporting on purpose.
If these firms were not immune from civil and even criminal prosecution as a result of what Biden and Trump did the plaintiff's bar would have been crawling up *******s months ago.
/snip
Uh, That's Not A Conspiracy Theory
There is an article floating around from The Expose that makes an explosive claim: There is a wildly statistically-significant skew in the death rate from Covid-19 vaccines by lot number.What originally got my attention was the tinfoil hat crowd screaming about lot
market-ticker.org
intothatgoodnight
. . .
Not discussed by Karl - what if different lots are designed/pre-chosen to target certain genetic profiles, while remaining seemingly harmless to other genetic profiles? <or some flavor of this idea>Denninger went into the info and the lot numbers and verified some of the claims that he thought the tin foil hat brigade was making. I'll just do a few snips and then give a link as it's an in-depth read.
/snip
2021-11-02 07:40 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 18829 references
Uh, That's Not A Conspiracy Theory
There is an article floating around from The Expose that makes an explosive claim: There is a wildly statistically-significant skew in the death rate from Covid-19 vaccines by lot number.
What originally got my attention was the tinfoil hat crowd screaming about lots being intentionally distributed to certain people to kill them -- in other words certain Covid-19 vaccine lots were for all intents and purposes poisoned. That was wildly unlikely so I set out to disprove it and apply some broom handles to the tinfoil hatters heads. What I found, however, was both interesting and deeply disturbing.
Lots are quite large, especially when you're dealing with 200 million people and 400 million doses. Assuming the lots are not preferentially assigned to certain cohorts (e.g. one goes to all nursing homes, etc) adverse reactions should thus be evenly distributed between lots; if they're not one of these things is almost-certainly true:
/snip
- There is a serious manufacturing quality problem or you produced something without understanding how it would work in the body and thus failed to control for something you had to in order to wind up with reproduceable results. That is, some lots are ok, others are contaminated, have too much or too little of the active ingredient in them, some produce wildly more spike-protein than others in the body when injected, etc.
OR
- Much worse, the lots are intentionally segregated to produce different results. This implies some sort of nefarious intent such as killing people on a differential basis or that the manufacturers are running unsanctioned experiments on a mass basis among the population at-large, since they know what is in each lot and intentionallyvaried the contents.
OR
- Perhaps worst of all, reports are now being intentionally suppressed, the injury and death rate hasn't changed and there are lots with one of the two above problems but it is being intentionally not reported, having been detected almost-instantly and health providers were directed to not report anything serious (e.g. death) associated with the jabs.
What the actual **** is going on here? You're going to try to tell me that the CDC, NIH and FDA don't know about this? I can suck this data into a database, run 30 seconds of queries against it and instantly identify a wildly-elevated death and hazard rate associated with certain lot numbers when the distribution of those associations should be reasonably-even, or at least something close to it, across all the lots produced and used? Then I look to try to find the obvious potential "clean" explanation (the higher death rate lot could have gone into older people) and it's simply not there when one looks at all adverse event reports. I have Moderna lots with the same average age of persons who died but ten times times the number of associated deaths.
Then I look at reported date of death and.... its reasonably close to an even distribution. So no, it wasn't all those old people getting killed at once in the first month. So much for that attempted explanation.
Oh if you're interested the nastiest lot was literally everywhere in terms of states reporting adverse events against it; no, they didn't concentrate them in one state or region either.
/snip
In other words the best-fit hypothesis is that causing the body to produce part of a pathogen when that part has pathological capacity (as we know is the case for the spike) cannot be controlled adequately through commercial manufacturing process at-scale. This means that no vector-based, irrespective of how (e.g. viral vector or mRNA), not-directly-infused coronavirus jab will ever have an acceptable safety profile because some lots will be "hot" and harm crazy percentages of those they're given to with no way to know in advance. The basic premise used here -- to have the body produce the agent the immune system identifies rather than directly introduce it where you can control the quantity, is a failure.
The entire premise of calling something that does this a "vaccine" is bogus and in the context of a coronavirus this may never be able to be done safely.
Something is very wrong here folks and the people running VAERS either aren't looking on purpose, know damn well its happening and are saying nothing about it on purpose -- never mind segregating the data in such a fashion that casual perusal of their downloads won't find it -- or saw it immediately and suppressed reporting on purpose.
If these firms were not immune from civil and even criminal prosecution as a result of what Biden and Trump did the plaintiff's bar would have been crawling up *******s months ago.
/snip
Uh, That's Not A Conspiracy Theory
There is an article floating around from The Expose that makes an explosive claim: There is a wildly statistically-significant skew in the death rate from Covid-19 vaccines by lot number.What originally got my attention was the tinfoil hat crowd screaming about lotmarket-ticker.org
Will agree with Karl's conclusion - something else is going on, here, and needs honest investigation.
intothegoodnight
Crusty Echo 7
Veteran Member
Take a look at this site, lots of information on adverse reactions and personal testimonies…too many to post
psychgirl
Has No Life - Lives on TB
A really good friend of mine on fake book (I knew her ages before fake book came around)....she’s extremely Christian conservative minded.
Anyway she started going through the lot numbers with VAERS a couple of weeks ago and was finding some disturbing results, too.
It’s too detailed and math oriented (math is not my thing ) so at the time, I just skimmed her posts.
She’s was right!!
I’m going to link the article and send to her.
Thank you!
Anyway she started going through the lot numbers with VAERS a couple of weeks ago and was finding some disturbing results, too.
It’s too detailed and math oriented (math is not my thing ) so at the time, I just skimmed her posts.
She’s was right!!
I’m going to link the article and send to her.
Thank you!