It is unbelievable that they think they can just normalise these sorts of trial results. I guess most of us are not proficient at interpreting trial results and they just take advantage of that fact. I am grateful to have the people like yourself who I have found over recent years. I have good instincts but it is also nice to know there are reliable sources who I can trust to bring balance.
Dr. J, at it again as an expert on a subject she knows inside out, warning us and in process saving lives. How could anyone not be impressed by her expertise and mind that brings truth to the debate upon which lives depend. Thank you lovely woman, you do a priceless service here as do others acting as beacons of safety that undoubtedly prevents lies and liars from taking the day. In a potpourri of pathetic peonistic pukes who lie like Persian rugs, you put the "t" in truth and I am grateful both to you and for the day you were born.
You are a walking miracle Dr. J and do not forget that. I know exactly who and what you are and it is awe inspiring. I cherish you and others like you here.
We have now added confounding variables to every vaccine trial, ie prior vaccines. How many of the trial participants already had mRNA issues undiscovered? Isn't this too small a study on which to be basing massive vaccination campaigns? It seems like the actual data is being ignored so that the injections can move forward. We are about to be in the same fix we were with Covid mRNA vaccines. Inadequate trials while pushing for the big bucks.
Here's how far gone I am in terms of trusting what the so-called ruling elite are up to. My first thoughts included the following:
They introduce this "vaccine" that reportedly prevents or lessens the sickness that results from a virus known as H5N1. Then they release something nasty from a lab they call H5N1 that, by itself, kills 1 in 100 people or turns the unfortunate victims into vegetables. Now how does the 1 in 200 vaccine look? To some, it might look like a risk they're willing to take. So the panicked populace lines up at the clinic doors to take their 1 in 200 chance. That's how far gone I am.
I am beyond annoyed at having to think like a psychopathic criminal in order to prepare for possible scenarios!
as long as you're 14 days out. good to go. i doubt they asked. here are the inclusion and exclusion criteria:
Inclusion Criteria:
Subjects ≥ 18 years of age, mentally competent, in good health as determined by medical history, physical examination and clinical judgment by the Investigator; able to comply with all study procedures, to be contacted, and to be available for study visits according to the protocol.
Exclusion Criteria:
Individuals who are pregnant or breastfeeding. Female subjects of childbearing potential must have a negative pregnancy test prior to study vaccines being administered.
Females of childbearing potential who refuse to use an acceptable method of birth control from Day 1 (1st vaccination) to 3 weeks after the second study vaccination, and, if sexually active, who have not used a reliable birth control method for at least two months prior to study entry.
Individuals with a body temperature ≥38.0 °C (≥100.4 °F) or any acute illness within 3 days of intended study vaccination.
Individuals who received any type of influenza vaccine (e.g., "seasonal") within 7 days prior to enrolment in this study or who are planning to receive any type of influenza vaccine within 7 days (before or after) from the study vaccines.
Individuals who received any other licensed vaccines within 14 days (for inactivated vaccines) or 28 days (for live vaccines) prior to enrollment in this study or who are planning to receive any (non-influenza) vaccine within 28 days (before or after) from the study vaccines.
Individuals with known or suspected impairment of the immune system.
If I was a Pharma exec, I would want to know for off-the-record/internal company purposes
Definitely a plus to have a better understanding of your own products, even if only to be better positioned to preempt potential risks or at least have a heads up to better plan how to deflect from product 'malfunctions'
But I suppose you're right, if only because it would probably prove difficult to implement, staff seem incompetent and woefully undertrained to say the least (e.g. Brooke Jackson), and one of them might tattletale on you
i am not sure. i suppose statistically, there's a 1/1000 chance that anyone might die in any trial regardless. but it does seem odd since clinical trial participants aren't really allowed to sign up unless they're provably healthy.
Perhaps (70% of) the so called healthy participants took other not that helpful jabs. So one needs to evaluate relative to an elevated baseline. What a mess we are in.
But a Placebo that they say is just saline? Unless air was injected along with the saline how would "just saline" kill anyone. The Pfizer trails showed their placebo was not simply saline and they also queered their study by later giving the control group the Covid jab, precluding long term follow up study. All this for a disease that has always been in bird populations because migratory birds poop in the water they swim in and farm animals drink from streams. Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine easily treat bird flu so why would anyone even suggest a 2 part injection that can kill 1 in 200. Something is very wrong here and smacks of a plan and, maybe gain of function work.
It is unbelievable that they think they can just normalise these sorts of trial results. I guess most of us are not proficient at interpreting trial results and they just take advantage of that fact. I am grateful to have the people like yourself who I have found over recent years. I have good instincts but it is also nice to know there are reliable sources who I can trust to bring balance.
The gal is an icon of excellence with a mind of gold.
Dr. J, at it again as an expert on a subject she knows inside out, warning us and in process saving lives. How could anyone not be impressed by her expertise and mind that brings truth to the debate upon which lives depend. Thank you lovely woman, you do a priceless service here as do others acting as beacons of safety that undoubtedly prevents lies and liars from taking the day. In a potpourri of pathetic peonistic pukes who lie like Persian rugs, you put the "t" in truth and I am grateful both to you and for the day you were born.
You are a walking miracle Dr. J and do not forget that. I know exactly who and what you are and it is awe inspiring. I cherish you and others like you here.
We have now added confounding variables to every vaccine trial, ie prior vaccines. How many of the trial participants already had mRNA issues undiscovered? Isn't this too small a study on which to be basing massive vaccination campaigns? It seems like the actual data is being ignored so that the injections can move forward. We are about to be in the same fix we were with Covid mRNA vaccines. Inadequate trials while pushing for the big bucks.
exactly
In other words here we go again! A one in 200 confirmed death rate should be a nonstarter.
How widely known is this information? How does it stack up to previous preliminary advanced and disclosed information?
If this is going to be S.O.P. from the cloven-hooved,
Let's be missionaries and convert them
with Baptism by Fire or firing squad.
The fight continues against the poisoning of Society
Here's how far gone I am in terms of trusting what the so-called ruling elite are up to. My first thoughts included the following:
They introduce this "vaccine" that reportedly prevents or lessens the sickness that results from a virus known as H5N1. Then they release something nasty from a lab they call H5N1 that, by itself, kills 1 in 100 people or turns the unfortunate victims into vegetables. Now how does the 1 in 200 vaccine look? To some, it might look like a risk they're willing to take. So the panicked populace lines up at the clinic doors to take their 1 in 200 chance. That's how far gone I am.
I am beyond annoyed at having to think like a psychopathic criminal in order to prepare for possible scenarios!
Do you have any speculation as to why this vaccine was so lethal? Even the covid vaccines didn't do this poorly in their trials....
my guess would be a synergistic-type of reaction based on the COVID-19 shot damage
if you punch someone in the gut right after gut surgery, it'll probably be bad... something like that
I wonder if they kept track of covid vaccination status
as long as you're 14 days out. good to go. i doubt they asked. here are the inclusion and exclusion criteria:
Inclusion Criteria:
Subjects ≥ 18 years of age, mentally competent, in good health as determined by medical history, physical examination and clinical judgment by the Investigator; able to comply with all study procedures, to be contacted, and to be available for study visits according to the protocol.
Exclusion Criteria:
Individuals who are pregnant or breastfeeding. Female subjects of childbearing potential must have a negative pregnancy test prior to study vaccines being administered.
Females of childbearing potential who refuse to use an acceptable method of birth control from Day 1 (1st vaccination) to 3 weeks after the second study vaccination, and, if sexually active, who have not used a reliable birth control method for at least two months prior to study entry.
Individuals with a body temperature ≥38.0 °C (≥100.4 °F) or any acute illness within 3 days of intended study vaccination.
Individuals who received any type of influenza vaccine (e.g., "seasonal") within 7 days prior to enrolment in this study or who are planning to receive any type of influenza vaccine within 7 days (before or after) from the study vaccines.
Individuals who received any other licensed vaccines within 14 days (for inactivated vaccines) or 28 days (for live vaccines) prior to enrollment in this study or who are planning to receive any (non-influenza) vaccine within 28 days (before or after) from the study vaccines.
Individuals with known or suspected impairment of the immune system.
If I was a Pharma exec, I would want to know for off-the-record/internal company purposes
Definitely a plus to have a better understanding of your own products, even if only to be better positioned to preempt potential risks or at least have a heads up to better plan how to deflect from product 'malfunctions'
But I suppose you're right, if only because it would probably prove difficult to implement, staff seem incompetent and woefully undertrained to say the least (e.g. Brooke Jackson), and one of them might tattletale on you
Is the 0.1% number for placebo expected roughly? This given the demographics of the group and given the number of days that the study lasted?
i am not sure. i suppose statistically, there's a 1/1000 chance that anyone might die in any trial regardless. but it does seem odd since clinical trial participants aren't really allowed to sign up unless they're provably healthy.
Perhaps (70% of) the so called healthy participants took other not that helpful jabs. So one needs to evaluate relative to an elevated baseline. What a mess we are in.
But a Placebo that they say is just saline? Unless air was injected along with the saline how would "just saline" kill anyone. The Pfizer trails showed their placebo was not simply saline and they also queered their study by later giving the control group the Covid jab, precluding long term follow up study. All this for a disease that has always been in bird populations because migratory birds poop in the water they swim in and farm animals drink from streams. Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine easily treat bird flu so why would anyone even suggest a 2 part injection that can kill 1 in 200. Something is very wrong here and smacks of a plan and, maybe gain of function work.
..."so why would anyone even suggest"....
Because prosecutors (are forced to?) ignore the Nuremberg Code.
They're coming for domestic cats next with these shots... to keep vets and other pets safe 🙄. Over my dead body.
Criminal.
By design
LET'S TRY THIS:
Amendment to the beginning of
the Modern Socratic Oath
[It's no longer just for doctors]:
..
1st stop others doing harm.
Do no harm.
Heal or minimize the harm done.by others
Punish or execute perpetrators of said harm, or provide information/testimony toward these actions.
------------------------------------------------------
The stipulations in this amendment
would bind all of the following:
- all medical practitioners.
- medical professional boards & associations
- executives and staff of all medical providers.
- executives and staff of all medical care manufacturers, contractors, suppliers and facilities.
- all government officials, elected and appointed,