fides' Jack Posted March 3, 2021 Share Posted March 3, 2021 (edited) I realize the nature of this article is sensitive for a number of people. But I think it's worth sharing. I sincerely hope this doesn't happen for anyone: https://www.theepochtimes.com/3-dozen-cases-of-spontaneous-miscarriages-stillbirths-occurring-after-covid-19-vaccination_3716385.html?utm_source=morningbriefnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-03-03 I will also state that I am the first person to believe that correlation does not imply causation. But if there's any chance at all... why risk it? When the tables were flipped, and pregnant women got the Wuhan virus and lost their babies, it was assumed (and counted) that the cause of the baby's death was covid-19. Why wouldn't people assume the reverse is also true? Do they really have that much blind faith in pharmaceutical companies? If people had that much faith in God, there would never have been mask mandates or mandated shut-downs or curfews... Edited March 3, 2021 by fides' Jack grammar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fides' Jack Posted March 3, 2021 Share Posted March 3, 2021 A study of data in Israel: http://www.nakim.org/israel-forums/viewtopic.php?t=270812&s=The_uncovering_of_the_vaccination_data_in_Israel__reveals_a_frightening_picture Conclusion: Quote We conclude that the Pfizer vaccines, for the elderly, killed during the 5-week vaccination period about 40 times more people than the disease itself would have killed, and about 260 times more people than the disease among the younger age class. We stress that this is in order to produce a green passport valid at most 6 months, and promote Pfizer sales. These estimated numbers of deaths from the vaccine are probably much lower than actual numbers as it accounts only for those defined as COVID-19 deaths for that short time period and does not include AVC and cardiac (and other) events resulting from the inflammatory reactions in tens of reports documented on the NAKIM site, which themselves are only the iceberg's tip, see here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 10 hours ago, fides' Jack said: Why wouldn't people assume the reverse is also true? Do they really have that much blind faith in pharmaceutical companies? Because to say it is the virus leaves an option that vaccine will save them. To say "it is a vaccine" means "we are screwed", no control whatsoever. This is precisely why animosity towards those who refuse to jump in. People like you spoil the hope that gives a peace of a mind, especially if they have a well-articulated position and (worst of all) if they are trying to share it with others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia Posted March 4, 2021 Share Posted March 4, 2021 (edited) fides' Jack Regarding the article, I read some months ago the paper written by the scientists involved in mRNA work (years ago); they warned that the mRNA vaccines may have adverse effect on fertility so I am not surprised (I posted the link to the paper some time ago somewhere on this phorum). As for blindness and going for a vaccine without thinking - it is simply because of stirred fear and panic, and also branding the vaccines as "saving vaccines". Edited March 4, 2021 by Anastasia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReasonableFaith Posted March 13, 2021 Share Posted March 13, 2021 On 3/3/2021 at 11:04 AM, fides' Jack said: I will also state that I am the first person to believe that correlation does not imply causation. But if there's any chance at all... why risk it? The linked article demonstrates a pivot in the argumentation of opponents of vaccination. In the current absence of the ability to demonstrably show widespread serious adverse effects the argument has pivoted. Now the opponents insist these vaccines cure or mitigate previously observed adverse medical conditions/outcomes. In this case miscarriages and still births are seen in the unvaccinated population at a given rate and miscarriages and still births are seen in the vaccinated population at a rate not demonstrated to exceed the unvaccinated population. Therefor it is unreasonable to vaccinate pregnant persons, even those those in a high risk category. These vaccines are not designed to eliminate/mitigate miscarriages and still births. There is no reason to expect those vaccinated will experience lower rate of these medical outcomes. Potentially, the vaccine may mitigate some of these outcomes from a reduction in pregnant persons contracting the virus or, albeit more nebulous, a reduction in emotional/mental stressors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted March 13, 2021 Share Posted March 13, 2021 I work in an industry that “work from home” is not an option for me or my crews. My mom and my father in law have been vaccinated. I live in Florida, where they are aggressively making the vaccines available as an option. I’m in great health but can get a shot Thursday. I’m doing it because it makes it less of a worry that I could infect coworker and disrupt other’s lives. I’ve seen people get sick , have long term health issues, die, or have financial issues. And yes, I’m tired of wearing a mask in 80 degree outside. I want to see friends and family, and stop being as careful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReasonableFaith Posted March 13, 2021 Share Posted March 13, 2021 (edited) On 3/3/2021 at 3:51 PM, fides' Jack said: Conclusion: Interestingly the linked article, also linked through a LifeSiteNews article, offers its very own explanation for the observed occurrences in the older (over 65) population. The directly linked article can be somewhat difficult to digest due to the original language. The portion of the article concerning the younger age groups seems easier to follow. The basic conclusion is this: A number of persons in this age group (X) were vaccinated. Statistical analysis shows the rate of persons in this age group expected to die from COVID related illnesses over a certain period of weeks (t) is Y. The number of vaccinated persons in this age group who died over this period (t) is Z. (X*Y)/t < Z...so sound the alarms! No mention is made in the article of the causes of death of these persons (Z). From what the article states persons may have died from any cause. These vaccines will not prevent one from dying from something unrelated to the virus, such a slipping on a banana peel and suffering life-ending injuries. As it must, the conspiratorial net has widened and now must include Israeli national health services as well as individual Israeli medical institutions and individual Israeli health professionals. In additional the authors have claimed they have been prevented from presenting their ‘findings’ by government, corporate, or individual actors, yet we read the article here. Media reporters are constantly on the hunt to be the first to ‘get the scoop’ or weigh in on explosive stories, yet in order to advance the conspiracy of the hidden widespread deleterious effects of these vaccines one must pass a mountain of evidence to the contrary on a trip to the farthest reaches of the internet and it’s associated medias. Edited March 13, 2021 by ReasonableFaith Spelling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fides' Jack Posted March 15, 2021 Share Posted March 15, 2021 On 3/13/2021 at 4:17 PM, ReasonableFaith said: (X*Y)/t < Z...so sound the alarms! Man, you are truly the king of fallacy! You go from Ad Hominems to Straw Men to Red Herrings effortlessly! You dismiss it because (X*Y)/t < Z seems silly and simple, but we both know that alarms should be sounded depending on what the true values of those variables are. Not that I agree that's what we're even looking at, to begin with... On 3/13/2021 at 4:17 PM, ReasonableFaith said: Media reporters are constantly on the hunt to be the first to ‘get the scoop’ or weigh in on explosive stories This is no longer true. Media reporters cannot and do not publish anything that contradicts the narrative their overlords want to push. Their bosses decide what they can and can't report on, and there have been many cases in recent years of high-level reporters expressing frustration that they had to sit on a huge story to the point of irrelevance because they weren't allowed to go public. Basically your position on a bunch of the things that I've posted boils down to, "No, it's too crazy to be true, therefore it's false." You haven't considered that the only reason it seems crazy to you is because you've bought into all the lies of the left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 On 3/14/2021 at 10:17 AM, ReasonableFaith said: As it must, the conspiratorial net has widened and now must include Israeli national health services as well as individual Israeli medical institutions and individual Israeli health professionals. In additional the authors have claimed they have been prevented from presenting their ‘findings’ by government, corporate, or individual actors, yet we read the article here. Media reporters are constantly on the hunt to be the first to ‘get the scoop’ or weigh in on explosive stories, yet in order to advance the conspiracy of the hidden widespread deleterious effects of these vaccines one must pass a mountain of evidence to the contrary on a trip to the farthest reaches of the internet and it’s associated medias. More material for you fiery speeches When it comes to vaccines, suddenly “from vs with” matters again "The doctor is actually arguing that refusing to live your life based on a 0.1% risk of death is foolish, and that nobody should be expected to do that. It is, literally, word for word a “Covid sceptic” argument, reproduced in the mainstream, without even the tiniest hint of irony or self-awareness. The very attitude they are taking towards “vaccine injury” is the same one they have condemned in “covid deniers” for over a year. By their hypocrisy they prove their own mendacity." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
little2add Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 the AstraZeneca vaccine may be bad Portugal and Spain join are suspending the roll-out of Oxford's AstraZeneca vaccine amid blood clot fears while Italy launches MANSLAUGHTER prob Ireland, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Iceland, Luxembourg, Slovenia and Bulgaria are the other European countries to have suspended AstraZeneca's vaccine too. Meanwhile, Austria, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Romania have stopped the use of one batch of the jab. And outside Europe, Indonesia, Thailand, Venezuela and the Democratic Republic of Congo have all paused or cancelled the start of their AstraZeneca programmes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
little2add Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 (edited) Domestically (USA), the AstraZeneca vaccine is still undergoing phase-three clinical trials and has therefore not been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, but the New York Times reported Friday that the federal government has purchased roughly 30 million doses that are being packaged in an Ohio facility. Edited March 16, 2021 by little2add Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted March 18, 2021 Share Posted March 18, 2021 OK I haven't decided to get a vaccine or not get one yet. I ain't eligible so it ain't even an issue yet. But if I do decide to get one, still leaning towards the JNJ right now because I have less safety concerns about taking that vaccine than the other two. I haven't seen a convincing case that I must take the Moderna over the JNJ from an ethical standpoint. All of them are tainted to some degree by the abortion issue. It ain't like you can get a little bit pregnant. The fact that one is slightly less tainted from an ethical standpoint than the other ain't enough for me to choose it if I think the other one is safer to take. Now, if everything else about them was equal, I would choose the one that is less tainted from an ethical standpoint, but I don't think that's the case. Regardless we'll see if I need one. Not looking like I'll be scheduled for at least another month or two. May not even be needed at that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia Posted March 18, 2021 Share Posted March 18, 2021 25 minutes ago, Peace said: All of them are tainted to some degree by the abortion issue. It ain't like you can get a little bit pregnant. The fact that one is slightly less tainted from an ethical standpoint than the other ain't enough for me to choose it if I think the other one is safer to take. That is correct. The difference is only that J&J used the abortion-derived foetal cell on all stages of a development and the other two only tested the product plus of course use it in a design. So however you look at it via partaking it you are partaking from a murder of a human being. Not participating in it but partaking, like communion. That would not have to be that way if the Church from the very beginning demanded only ethical vaccine, "no ethical vaccines - no vaccination for us, thank you". The Church also could initiate a campaign of a global repentance, for a usage of a body of murdered girl later called "HEK293" and also of a body of a boy later known as "PER.C6" - for their depersonalization in which the Church participates. But we do not see such a repentance and this is the worst aspect of the current situation. That makes me think of native American Indians, they were more civilized than the modern so-called civilized people because when they killed an animal (so I read) they would ask the spirit of that animal to forgive them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia Posted March 18, 2021 Share Posted March 18, 2021 This is not about the vaccines, this is about how they are being used. The video there is worthy to listen to. Jews complain to international court for violation of Nuremberg Code Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fides' Jack Posted March 18, 2021 Share Posted March 18, 2021 This is worth a read - including the herein-linked paper signed by the Kenyan Catholic Doctors: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/kenyan-catholic-doctors-reject-covid-vaccine-citing-suspect-motivation-behind-the-experimental-jabs?utm_source=top_news&utm_campaign=catholic 13 hours ago, Anastasia said: The Church also could initiate a campaign of a global repentance, for a usage of a body of murdered girl later called "HEK293" This is misunderstood, I think. The "293" portion of "HEK293" is actually the number of aborted babies that they used to make it. At least that is what a certain scientist (virologist) is alleging. It's not like there's only 1 dead baby being used in these cell lines, there are hundreds. Which of course only makes the issue more grave. These vaccines make us complicit in the worship of baphomet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now