-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Beer Virus VI-The Final Episode..... Hopefully
- Thread starter Bigtanker
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Caused More Deaths Than Saved: Peer-Reviewed Study | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
So in the last week I've gotten 2 phone calls from the CDC.
I didn't answer either. The first one they didn't leave a message. The second (I just got it), the left a message for e to call back to take a survey about the covid Vax, and "other" vaxes.
FTCDC
I didn't answer either. The first one they didn't leave a message. The second (I just got it), the left a message for e to call back to take a survey about the covid Vax, and "other" vaxes.
FTCDC
Uuuuhhhh…… Daves not here man.
If we’d done nothing, not blown out our deficit, killed many businesses, poisoned people with an experimental drug, nominees of it, odds are if you were healthy you’d not died.
Kenai Peninsula man is the first person to die of Alaskapox virus
Experts say to be cautious when handling small mammals in the state, but infection is rare and death unlikely.
alaskapublic.org
Hey, at least it wasn't a bat...
immunocompromised
I really do not like needing to post in this thread. It is always bad news.
"In every single month, four-dose vaccinated teenagers and young adults were significantly more likely to die than unvaccinated teenagers and young adults. The same can also be said for one-dose vaccinated teenagers and young adults, and two-dose vaccinated teens and young adults in February 2023.
The difference in mortality rates was so stark that the unvaccinated only managed to reach a mortality rate of 31.1 per 100,000 person-years in January, whereas the four-dose vaccinated managed to reach a shocking mortality rate of 106 per 100,000 person-years in the same month.
The one-dose vaccinated also fared much worse than the unvaccinated with a mortality rate of 53.3 per 100,000 person-years in January 2023.
For the remaining months, unvaccinated teens and young adults mortality rate remained within the 20-something per 100,000 person-years. Whereas four-dose vaccinated teens and young adults mortality rates only went as low as 80.9 per 100,00 in April and remained within 85 to 106 per 100,000 for the remaining months."
Link to the official data in the article.
expose-news.com
"In every single month, four-dose vaccinated teenagers and young adults were significantly more likely to die than unvaccinated teenagers and young adults. The same can also be said for one-dose vaccinated teenagers and young adults, and two-dose vaccinated teens and young adults in February 2023.
The difference in mortality rates was so stark that the unvaccinated only managed to reach a mortality rate of 31.1 per 100,000 person-years in January, whereas the four-dose vaccinated managed to reach a shocking mortality rate of 106 per 100,000 person-years in the same month.
The one-dose vaccinated also fared much worse than the unvaccinated with a mortality rate of 53.3 per 100,000 person-years in January 2023.
For the remaining months, unvaccinated teens and young adults mortality rate remained within the 20-something per 100,000 person-years. Whereas four-dose vaccinated teens and young adults mortality rates only went as low as 80.9 per 100,00 in April and remained within 85 to 106 per 100,000 for the remaining months."
Link to the official data in the article.
The Explosive Link Between COVID Vaccines and Increased Cancer Rates in Children & Young Adults
A report quietly published by the UK Government department known as the Office for National Statistics (ONS) shockingly reveals people aged 18 to 49 who have received four doses of the COVID-19 vac…
expose-news.com
RFK Jr. Scores Big Win In Lawsuit Accusing Biden Admin Of Censoring COVID Vaccine Info | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
A federal court has granted a preliminary injunction against the White House and other federal defendants in a lawsuit brought by Mr. Kennedy Jr. that accuses the Biden administration of orchestrating a campaign to pressure social media platforms to censor vaccine criticism.
Judge Terry A. Doughty of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana issued the ruling on Feb. 14, stating that Mr. Kennedy Jr. has demonstrated a strong likelihood of success in proving government infringement on his free speech rights.
Apparently they do not want active surveillance of covid vaccine effects, as there is zero being done in the USA.
www.zerohedge.com
www.zerohedge.com
More on this one at the source.
The AAPS filed its brief on Feb. 7, slamming AMA’s position.
“Our national motto is not ‘In Vaccines We Trust’, or even ‘In Government We Trust.’ The right to criticize vaccines and government mandates of vaccines should not be abridged” as sought after by the AMA and “other allies of the Biden Administration,” the brief said.
“Freedom to criticize is an essential safeguard against tyranny, and a First Amendment right … It is alarming that any professional organization would argue for censorship as the AMA Amici do in this case.”
The AMA amicus brief is supported by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American College of Physicians, and the American Geriatrics Society.
“The argument by the AMA Amici to declare a compelling interest in vaccination such that censorship of it would be allowed should be firmly rejected here,” AAPS said in its brief. For more than 50 years, there have not been any new categories of unprotected speech, it said.
“Criticism of vaccination is warranted in response to the exaggerations of benefits of vaccination and the denial of its proven harms, as illustrated by the AMA Amici brief here.
“A sharp decline in the prevalence of diseases cited by the AMA Amici began before the relevant vaccine became commonly used, thereby disproving the asserted cause-and-effect.”
The AMA brief also fails to reference the “immense harm” caused by several novel or contaminated vaccines, like the first polio shots, AAPS stated.
Allowing the federal government to censor vaccine criticism will open the doorway to “an unaccountable license to play God in tinkering with human biology.”
AAPS warned that by seeking to censor criticism of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, the AMA brief signers “implicitly seek censorship of criticism of anything that may be called a vaccine in the future under yet another redefinition of that term.”
“The same arguments made by the AMA Amici could be extended to other types of speech disfavored by the Biden Administration, such as criticism of transgender procedures and late-term abortion,” the group said.
“The requested censorship by or with government should be fully rejected here.”
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on March 18. The lawsuit was filed by the state of Missouri, Louisiana, several social media users, and the founder of the blog Gateway Pundit.
The Epoch Times reached out to the White House and AMA for comment.
Under President Joe Biden, the federal government is alleged to have engaged in censorship of COVID-19 vaccine-related discussions online.
US Officials Concede No Active Surveillance On Long-Term Effects Of COVID-19 Vaccines | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
"License To Play God": Physician Group Files Brief Against Biden In COVID | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
The AAPS filed its brief on Feb. 7, slamming AMA’s position.
“Our national motto is not ‘In Vaccines We Trust’, or even ‘In Government We Trust.’ The right to criticize vaccines and government mandates of vaccines should not be abridged” as sought after by the AMA and “other allies of the Biden Administration,” the brief said.
“Freedom to criticize is an essential safeguard against tyranny, and a First Amendment right … It is alarming that any professional organization would argue for censorship as the AMA Amici do in this case.”
The AMA amicus brief is supported by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American College of Physicians, and the American Geriatrics Society.
“The argument by the AMA Amici to declare a compelling interest in vaccination such that censorship of it would be allowed should be firmly rejected here,” AAPS said in its brief. For more than 50 years, there have not been any new categories of unprotected speech, it said.
“Criticism of vaccination is warranted in response to the exaggerations of benefits of vaccination and the denial of its proven harms, as illustrated by the AMA Amici brief here.
“A sharp decline in the prevalence of diseases cited by the AMA Amici began before the relevant vaccine became commonly used, thereby disproving the asserted cause-and-effect.”
The AMA brief also fails to reference the “immense harm” caused by several novel or contaminated vaccines, like the first polio shots, AAPS stated.
Allowing the federal government to censor vaccine criticism will open the doorway to “an unaccountable license to play God in tinkering with human biology.”
AAPS warned that by seeking to censor criticism of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, the AMA brief signers “implicitly seek censorship of criticism of anything that may be called a vaccine in the future under yet another redefinition of that term.”
Could Ban RFK Jr.
If adopted, AMA’s proposal would allow the government to censor presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., whose book “The Real Anthony Fauci” could also be banned by the administration, AAPS added.“The same arguments made by the AMA Amici could be extended to other types of speech disfavored by the Biden Administration, such as criticism of transgender procedures and late-term abortion,” the group said.
“The requested censorship by or with government should be fully rejected here.”
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on March 18. The lawsuit was filed by the state of Missouri, Louisiana, several social media users, and the founder of the blog Gateway Pundit.
The Epoch Times reached out to the White House and AMA for comment.
Under President Joe Biden, the federal government is alleged to have engaged in censorship of COVID-19 vaccine-related discussions online.
Last edited:
Apparently in the UK(here likely as well,you just look at those sedated on vents officially 80+% died) it appears patients in hospitals with covid were euthanized.
en-volve.com
‘Crime of the Century’: New Research Paper Raises Horrifying Possibility Covid Patients Were ‘Euthanized’
A new research paper in pre-print circulation at the open access journal Medical & Clinical Research raises the horrifying possibility that certain Covid-19 pat
en-volve.com
Last edited:
The only one in the presidential race that would likely do anything about any of this likely won’t win. No hanging will ever occur and the people responsible will never be held accountable.Apparently in the UK(here likely as well,you just look at those sedated on vents officially 80+% died) it appears patients in hospitals with covid were euthanized.
‘Crime of the Century’: New Research Paper Raises Horrifying Possibility Covid Patients Were ‘Euthanized’
A new research paper in pre-print circulation at the open access journal Medical & Clinical Research raises the horrifying possibility that certain Covid-19 pat
‘Stunning Act of Scientific Censorship’: Journal Retracts Peer-Reviewed Study Critiquing COVID-19 Vaccine
The journal Cureus on Monday retracted the first peer-reviewed paper to provide an extensive analysis of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine trial data and post-injection injuries. The authors of the paper also called for a global moratorium on the vaccines.
childrenshealthdefense.org
Cereus pulls a vaccine study, after publishing it. They put it through the wringer to. 9 peer reviews before they published it. It passed them all. So why did they pull it?
“Following publication, concerns were raised regarding a number of claims made in the article and an investigation by Cureus and Springer Nature’s Research Integrity team identified several issues with the article which warranted a retraction.”
published last month, detailed the vaccines’ potential serious harms to humans, vaccine control and processing issues, the mechanisms behind adverse events, the immunological reasons for vaccine inefficacy and the mortality data from the registrational trials.
The authors concluded:
“Federal agency approval of the COVID-19 mRNA injectable products on a blanket-coverage population-wide basis had no support from an honest assessment of all relevant registrational data and commensurate consideration of risks versus benefits.”
They also called for the vaccines to be immediately removed from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) childhood immunization schedule and for the boosters to be suspended.
The paper was read more than 350,000 times in the month after it was posted. An average Cureus paper has only approximately 2,700 views in an entire year.
McCullough told The Defender:
“I am suspicious that Kersjes and Springer Nature were pressured by the powerful Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex of coordinated public health organizations, vaccine manufacturers, and regulatory agencies to censor our paper to keep critical vaccine safety information from getting to the medical community.
“We rejected the retraction, fully appealed and will report this unethical action to all relevant authorities as we move on to publish elsewhere.”
M. Nathaniel Mead, the paper’s lead author, told The Defender he had been concerned from day one that the journal would be pressured to retract the article.
“I knew as soon as I hit the Cureus ‘publish’ button on January 24, following the extensive review process and multiple re-submissions, that we were dealing with a ticking time bomb,” Mead said.
“By citing solid evidence and exposing how the industry-sponsored trials misled the public, our evidence-informed paper was an all-out indictment of the COVID-19 vaccine enterprise.”
“It is unethical and unconscionable to administer an experimental vaccine to a child who has a near-zero risk of dying from COVID-19 (IFR, 0.0003%) but a well-established 2.2% risk of permanent heart damage based on the best prospective data available,” they wrote.
Finally, the authors called for a full investigation into misconduct by the pharmaceutical companies and the regulatory agencies.
Mead added, “Once a major counter-narrative paper gets published and its findings begin to garner lots of attention, the Bio-Pharma stakeholders exert immense pressure on the publisher to retract the paper.”
The retraction has implications that extend beyond the article, Mead said. These kinds of “predatory retractions” benefit the Bio-Pharmaceutical enterprise, he said, by concealing information about vaccine risks, undermining the credibility of the research and of the authors themselves.
“This is going to force scientists who are interested in the truth to seek out alternate publishing venues and strategies, perhaps even alternate peer-review systems,” he added.
Springer Nature did not respond to a request for comment.
Too big to fail.‘Stunning Act of Scientific Censorship’: Journal Retracts Peer-Reviewed Study Critiquing COVID-19 Vaccine
The journal Cureus on Monday retracted the first peer-reviewed paper to provide an extensive analysis of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine trial data and post-injection injuries. The authors of the paper also called for a global moratorium on the vaccines.
Cereus pulls a vaccine study, after publishing it. They put it through the wringer to. 9 peer reviews before they published it. It passed them all. So why did they pull it?
“Following publication, concerns were raised regarding a number of claims made in the article and an investigation by Cureus and Springer Nature’s Research Integrity team identified several issues with the article which warranted a retraction.”
published last month, detailed the vaccines’ potential serious harms to humans, vaccine control and processing issues, the mechanisms behind adverse events, the immunological reasons for vaccine inefficacy and the mortality data from the registrational trials.
The authors concluded:
“Federal agency approval of the COVID-19 mRNA injectable products on a blanket-coverage population-wide basis had no support from an honest assessment of all relevant registrational data and commensurate consideration of risks versus benefits.”
They also called for the vaccines to be immediately removed from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) childhood immunization schedule and for the boosters to be suspended.
The paper was read more than 350,000 times in the month after it was posted. An average Cureus paper has only approximately 2,700 views in an entire year.
McCullough told The Defender:
“I am suspicious that Kersjes and Springer Nature were pressured by the powerful Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex of coordinated public health organizations, vaccine manufacturers, and regulatory agencies to censor our paper to keep critical vaccine safety information from getting to the medical community.
“We rejected the retraction, fully appealed and will report this unethical action to all relevant authorities as we move on to publish elsewhere.”
M. Nathaniel Mead, the paper’s lead author, told The Defender he had been concerned from day one that the journal would be pressured to retract the article.
“I knew as soon as I hit the Cureus ‘publish’ button on January 24, following the extensive review process and multiple re-submissions, that we were dealing with a ticking time bomb,” Mead said.
“By citing solid evidence and exposing how the industry-sponsored trials misled the public, our evidence-informed paper was an all-out indictment of the COVID-19 vaccine enterprise.”
“It is unethical and unconscionable to administer an experimental vaccine to a child who has a near-zero risk of dying from COVID-19 (IFR, 0.0003%) but a well-established 2.2% risk of permanent heart damage based on the best prospective data available,” they wrote.
Finally, the authors called for a full investigation into misconduct by the pharmaceutical companies and the regulatory agencies.
Mead added, “Once a major counter-narrative paper gets published and its findings begin to garner lots of attention, the Bio-Pharma stakeholders exert immense pressure on the publisher to retract the paper.”
The retraction has implications that extend beyond the article, Mead said. These kinds of “predatory retractions” benefit the Bio-Pharmaceutical enterprise, he said, by concealing information about vaccine risks, undermining the credibility of the research and of the authors themselves.
“This is going to force scientists who are interested in the truth to seek out alternate publishing venues and strategies, perhaps even alternate peer-review systems,” he added.
Springer Nature did not respond to a request for comment.
Yep, like “green” climate change.
Hundreds of billions at play, and you can’t sue them or say no.
It’s all a scam at best, and a population control, social control at worst.
Amazon Bowed to White House Pressure to Conceal COVID Books
Amazon bowed to White House pressure to suppress books that criticized the COVID-19 vaccines, House Judiciary Committee documents show.
I also noticed that Amazon also stopped selling NAC during the height of covid. You can find it on the site now, after the FDA said it is ok.
Too much $$$$$
People complain about 'the way things are', but then they sell their soul for $$$$.
People complain about 'the way things are', but then they sell their soul for $$$$.
