The coronabrexit thread. I mean, coronavirus thread

[maxjam]

58 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Probably worth mentioning that this is a supposed leak rather than an official release, and Pfizer have said that the document is unauthenticated, so that might go some way to explain why the media haven't been covering it in any detail

I looked at the doc and I couldn't work out how many vaccinations had been given in relation to the adverse effects listed

Or how they ascertained that the adverse effects were linked to the vaccination, rather than just occurring for other reasons

If you can't see the percentages and you can't measure the normal statistical occurrences of these adverse events in the general population then it seems obvious to me that the document doesn't allow any concrete conclusions to be drawn - without filling in the blanks with assumptions that fit the conclusion you want to make (in order to push the buttons of your 2million youtube subscribers)

Official docs here;

https://phmpt.org/

If you watched the video he quite clearly states that the number of vaccinations has been redacted in the document.  Why would Pfizer want that number hidden?  Answers here please...  Your own bias will lead you to whatever conclusion it is you want.  Personally, I just want the truth and the redacted parts should have the data provided.  I can't think of a reason why the total number of vaccines given would need to be hidden?!?

Regardless, 40k+ adverse events and 1200 deaths in under 3 months is a concern and should have been public knowledge.  We should have been made fully aware of any side-effects (and compensated for them) and it should have been made illegal (all around the world) to mandate something that no matter how small of a chance may kill you.

I find your final comment is an insult to Dr Campbells work.  I have checked his channel out - which has given out excellent information since long before the pandemic started, and found your remark nothing more than a cheap shot at trying to discredit him ? 

Personally, I'm very interested to see what the data the upcoming releases will tell us - the release so far is only for the first 3 months, 2-4 weeks of which some countries hadn't even started their vaccination programmes and all were primarily focussed on jabbing the elderly and vulnerable. 

Someone linked a video in the comments from a Dr. Bean which is and hour long and worth a watch.  He is also concerned with parts of the document that have been redacted and highlights the findings of more recent studies in the younger generations that show the number of adverse effects from the vaccine to be far worse than what we've been led to believe. 

Again, this needs proper media attention and scrutiny.  We shouldnt allow Big Pharma to try and lock data away for 75yrs and redact information once told to release it (private personal info aside).  I find it stunning that there is barely any mention in or investigative journalism being carried out by the mainstream media.

[Stive Pesley]

2 hours ago, maxjam said:

If you watched the video he quite clearly states that the number of vaccinations has been redacted in the document.  Why would Pfizer want that number hidden?  Answers here please...  Your own bias will lead you to whatever conclusion it is you want.  Personally, I just want the truth and the redacted parts should have the data provided.  I can't think of a reason why the total number of vaccines given would need to be hidden?!?

Surely you can? There are 2 reasons

1) Because Pfizer want to cover it up

2) Because the document has been tampered with by those behind the leak in order to throw suspicion on 1

The beauty of actually questioning everything is that you have to actually question everything. 

2 hours ago, maxjam said:

Regardless, 40k+ adverse events and 1200 deaths in under 3 months is a concern

In 3 months worldwide something like 9 million people die - the vast majority of which will be the elderly and the clinically vulnerable (ie in the target groups for the first 3 months of vaccinations) - so to be honest the number seems very low to me

Again - not dismissing the figures - just that there are far too many unknowns in this document for anyone to draw any conclusions from

2 hours ago, maxjam said:

I find your final comment is an insult to Dr Campbells work.  I have checked his channel out - which has given out excellent information since long before the pandemic started, and found your remark nothing more than a cheap shot at trying to discredit him

He spent 20 minutes in that video repeatedly saying the word "safe" in a sarcastic voice, thereby implying that these figures show the vaccines aren't safe. That's despite there being far too much missing information for anyone to draw that conclusion

Sorry if I find that schtick a bit suspect. I would happily value his opinion if he was honest about the facts that the documents lacked enough detail to draw any useful conclusion. But he didn't so I don't

To be honest - given that I know you like to question everything too, not sure why you didn't pick up on that

 

[maxjam]

1 hour ago, Stive Pesley said:

Surely you can? There are 2 reasons

1) Because Pfizer want to cover it up

2) Because the document has been tampered with by those behind the leak in order to throw suspicion on 1

1.  I was giving Pfizer the benefit of the doubt despite key redactions.

2. I cant find a Pfizer statement saying the documents are false, only a vague articles such as this stating that reports circulating on social media are 'unauthenticated' whilst the actual documents have been released on the FDA website.  The documents that Dr Campbell and other respected sources are using are legit.  I don't care what people say on twitter.

https://www.iol.co.za/news/covid19/pfizer-says-vaccine-adverse-event-document-circulating-on-social-media-is-unauthenticated-039b6345-0479-4dc3-931d-97c79d0f557f

 

1 hour ago, Stive Pesley said:

The beauty of actually questioning everything is that you have to actually question everything. 

In 3 months worldwide something like 9 million people die - the vast majority of which will be the elderly and the clinically vulnerable (ie in the target groups for the first 3 months of vaccinations) - so to be honest the number seems very low to me

Again - not dismissing the figures - just that there are far too many unknowns in this document for anyone to draw any conclusions from

Exactly why there should be media noise and an investigation into the findings.  

We don't know how many vaccinations were given in the 3 month time period but we do know there were verified vaccine related deaths and serious adverse effects.  Brushing them off as a small number doesnt provide any resolution to family members that have been harmed by vaccines or have lost loved ones needlessly. 

Redacting the total number of vaccines given only raises concerns that the percentage of negative consequences is both higher than we have been led to believe and higher than is generally considered acceptable.

To even consider mandating a vaccine surely the public have the right to know exactly what the associated risks are - not just be told repeatedly its 'safe and effective' and get called a conspiracy theorist for asking for evidence.  Again, where is the media outcry and investigation into this?

1 hour ago, Stive Pesley said:

He spent 20 minutes in that video repeatedly saying the word "safe" in a sarcastic voice, thereby implying that these figures show the vaccines aren't safe. That's despite there being far too much missing information for anyone to draw that conclusion

Sorry if I find that schtick a bit suspect. I would happily value his opinion if he was honest about the facts that the documents lacked enough detail to draw any useful conclusion. But he didn't so I don't

To be honest - given that I know you like to question everything too, not sure why you didn't pick up on that

I think you are watching a very different to video to the one I watched and have a very different opinion of the man than I have.  Dr Campbell always provides links and replicates data and quotes in full.  I am happy to forgive him his momentary 'sarcasm lapse' as throughout the pandemic (and career) he has been a strong advocate of vaccination and we have been told that the jabs were 'safe and effective' - he states he is unhappy with the findings and as a medical professional feels letdown that we weren't told about the negative consequences earlier.   Understandable imho.  

Edited March 10, 2022 by maxjam

[maxjam]

Further to the above, the only mention of the initial batch of Pfizer documents released I can find in the MSM is on GBNews if you can call them mainstream.  I know some of you will immediately roll your eyes at the mention of GBN but the conversation really is quite balanced.

 

[Stive Pesley]

On the subject of GBNews - have you read much about the Legatum group that finance the channel?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5695573/Legatum-founder-suspected-spy.html

 

[Carl Sagan]

Apparently, in England the stats show Covid is 40x less lethal than in January 2021 and also now less lethal than flu across every age group: 

There remains a very slightly raised mortality risk because omicron has been so infectious, meaning more people have it than regular flu.

[uttoxram75]

We have more people off work with Shingles then Covid atm.

 

 

[Boycie]

Well this threads slowed down a bit hasn’t it?

all incoming covid restrictions dropped on entry to the Uk.

Even them that aren’t vaccinated with tin foil hats.

 

[Eddie]

20 hours ago, uttoxram75 said:

We have more people off work with Shingles then Covid atm.

 

 

DIY roofing must take precedent.

[May Contain Nuts]

On 09/03/2022 at 20:28, maxjam said:

The biggest health emergency in our lifetime for which Pfizer wanted to suppress the data from for 75 years hasn't even caused a ripple

An oft-quoted 'fact' that when I looked into it a few months ago could find no evidence of.

Closest I could find was the FDA saying it would take 55 years to fully process an FOI request based on the number of staff and the level confidentiality required, which was a bit questionable but.... ehhhh. That seems to have jumped to 75 years now, although maybe we're talking about something else entirely.

Whether I checked the 'wrong' places I don't know, but I suspect it didn't cause a ripple because it was baalocks, not that such a status ever stopped anything else from gaining traction, on both sides.

I did very very briefly look into links between Pfizer & FDA and can see how one may influence the other, and can see why suspicions and conspiracies may arise there. Whether they bear out under close inspection I can't say. I'm not anally obsessive enough to check further, especially now.

Either way, it's ducking hilarious to see that even though this thread and the discussion is pretty much dead, some people are still using it to push an agenda, desperate to be proven right,  even when nobody can be arsed to argue with them!

Edited March 14, 2022 by Coconut's Beard

[maxjam]

26 minutes ago, Coconut's Beard said:

An oft-quoted 'fact' that when I looked into it a few months ago could find no evidence of.

Closest I could find was the FDA saying it would take 55 years to fully process an FOI request based on the number of staff and the level confidentiality required, which was a bit questionable but.... ehhhh. That seems to have jumped to 75 years now, although maybe we're talking about something else entirely.

Whether I checked the 'wrong' places I don't know, but I suspect it didn't cause a ripple because it was baalocks, not that such a status ever stopped anything else from gaining traction, on both sides.

I did very very briefly look into links between Pfizer & FDA and can see how one may influence the other, and can see why suspicions and conspiracies may arise there. Whether they bear out under close inspection I can't say. I'm not anally obsessive enough to check further, especially now.

Either way, it's ducking hilarious to see that even though this thread and the discussion is pretty much dead, some people are still using it to push an agenda, desperate to be proven right,  even when nobody can be arsed to argue with them!

I don't think it really matters whether it was 55yrs or 75yrs (and you can find articles stating both), the fact that Govts seemingly want to jab everybody multiple times with a vaccine that was created, tested and mass produced in record time and were happy to allow Pfizers request to seal documents for a significant amount of time raised eyebrows. 

We have been assured that the vaccines are safe and effective and were threatened with potential loss of freedoms and livelihoods if we refused, yet it took a court order to get the FDA to start releasing the data Pfizer should really have made readily available prior to asking everyone to go for their jabs - even now many and despite the court order many pages have signifcant redactions making drawing conclusions at what the data presents difficult.  

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10222035/FDA-says-need-55-YEARS-make-vaccine-related-information-available-public.html

https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1548776/pfizer-vaccine-safety-data-released-us-judge-ruling-fda-coronavirus-pandemic

I'm not sure whether your final paragraph relates to me directly and tbh I don't care.  I am personally very invested in getting to the 'truth' of the data, whether alternative treatments have been suppressed for profit and want the Govt held responsible for their handling of the pandemic. 

The fact that we're now (hopefully) through the other side makes no odds and I am doing what small part I can to press for answers.

[Comrade 86]

Changing the world, one football forum at a time ?

[ketteringram]

10 hours ago, Boycie said:

Well this threads slowed down a bit hasn’t it?

all incoming covid restrictions dropped on entry to the Uk.

Even them that aren’t vaccinated with tin foil hats.

 

Meanwhile, millions of people in China under new lockdown. So, are they doing that just for Omicron? Or something worse??

[i-Ram]

7 hours ago, maxjam said:

I don't think it really matters whether it was 55yrs or 75yrs (and you can find articles stating both), the fact that Govts seemingly want to jab everybody multiple times with a vaccine that was created, tested and mass produced in record time and were happy to allow Pfizers request to seal documents for a significant amount of time raised eyebrows. 

We have been assured that the vaccines are safe and effective and were threatened with potential loss of freedoms and livelihoods if we refused, yet it took a court order to get the FDA to start releasing the data Pfizer should really have made readily available prior to asking everyone to go for their jabs - even now many and despite the court order many pages have signifcant redactions making drawing conclusions at what the data presents difficult.  

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10222035/FDA-says-need-55-YEARS-make-vaccine-related-information-available-public.html

https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1548776/pfizer-vaccine-safety-data-released-us-judge-ruling-fda-coronavirus-pandemic

I'm not sure whether your final paragraph relates to me directly and tbh I don't care.  I am personally very invested in getting to the 'truth' of the data, whether alternative treatments have been suppressed for profit and want the Govt held responsible for their handling of the pandemic. 

The fact that we're now (hopefully) through the other side makes no odds and I am doing what small part I can to press for answers.

'If it falls to me to start a fight to cut out the cancer of bent and twisted Governmental decision making in our country with the simple sword of truth and the trusty shield of fair play, so be it. I am ready for the fight.”

[May Contain Nuts]

11 hours ago, maxjam said:

I don't think it really matters whether it was 55yrs or 75yrs (and you can find articles stating both), the fact that Govts seemingly want to jab everybody multiple times with a vaccine that was created, tested and mass produced in record time and were happy to allow Pfizers request to seal documents for a significant amount of time raised eyebrows. 

We have been assured that the vaccines are safe and effective and were threatened with potential loss of freedoms and livelihoods if we refused, yet it took a court order to get the FDA to start releasing the data Pfizer should really have made readily available prior to asking everyone to go for their jabs - even now many and despite the court order many pages have signifcant redactions making drawing conclusions at what the data presents difficult.  

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10222035/FDA-says-need-55-YEARS-make-vaccine-related-information-available-public.html

https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1548776/pfizer-vaccine-safety-data-released-us-judge-ruling-fda-coronavirus-pandemic

I'm not sure whether your final paragraph relates to me directly and tbh I don't care.  I am personally very invested in getting to the 'truth' of the data, whether alternative treatments have been suppressed for profit and want the Govt held responsible for their handling of the pandemic. 

The fact that we're now (hopefully) through the other side makes no odds and I am doing what small part I can to press for answers.

Thanks the links but I was hoping for something a bit more insightful, something that actually backed up the statement that "Pfizer wanted to suppress the data from for 75 years" with cold hard proof that Pfizer themselves did request that, not the FDA.

As I said, I looked into it briefly a few moths ago and can vaguely remember that the FDA gets part-funded through big business, but it wasn't enough to really nail down such emotive claims.

Edited March 15, 2022 by Coconut's Beard

[maxjam]

56 minutes ago, Coconut's Beard said:

Thanks the links but I was hoping for something a bit more insightful, something that actually backed up the statement that "Pfizer wanted to suppress the data from for 75 years" with cold hard proof that Pfizer themselves did request that, not the FDA.

As I said, I looked into it briefly a few moths ago and can vaguely remember that the FDA gets part-funded through big business, but it wasn't enough to really nail down such emotive claims.

Yes it was the FDA that wanted 75yrs to release the data.  I think the Pfizer 'confusion' comes from sloppy headlines or comments - such as the one I made tbf.  Rather than explain what the FDA is and the difference its just easier to gloss over 'pfizer docs' and '75yrs' as ultimately those are the documents we want to see.  Regardless of the who and the why, in the interests of full transparency the documents should have been made available a long time ago.

As for FDA funding and corruption, how far down the rabbit hole do you want to go? The following USA Today article states that 

'Based on our research, we rate PARTLY FALSE the claim a majority of the FDA's budget comes from companies it regulates'

but goes on to state that Pfizer et al 

'do comprise a majority of the funding for the subsection of the agency that handles drug approvals'

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/08/27/fact-check-some-fdas-budget-does-come-industry-funding/5572076001/

There is another good article here re. conflicts of interest;

https://www.science.org/content/article/hidden-conflicts-pharma-payments-fda-advisers-after-drug-approvals-spark-ethical

Then of course there are articles such as this one...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10511535/Former-FDA-head-Scott-Gottlieb-warns-against-delaying-application-COVID-19-vaccine-kids.html

Headline: 'Ex-FDA chief Scott Gottlieb fears delaying seeking approval for COVID-19 vaccine for under-fives will 'confuse' parents and make them less interested in vaccinating their kids - as he urges CDC to relax national indoor mask guidelines

Multiple mentions about him working previously for the FDA and urging them to promote vaccines for the under 5s etc.  Not one mention of him being a current Pfizer board member...

https://www.pfizer.com/people/leadership/board_of_directors/scott_gottlieb-md

So yeah, whilst I could have phrased my comment a little better I make no apologies for continuing to demand the truth and investigations into what has happened over the past few years - with particular interest into early treatments that if proven to be true, had the potential to save millions of lives and prevent the build up of massive worldwide debt and Govt oppression.

And no, I don't expect to change any hearts and minds on here - you're either preaching to the choir or a figure of fun but I'll continue to post the occasional new bit of information that some people may find interesting and ignore the trolls.  Whilst I haven't yet reached levels of activism that require me to leave the comfort of sitting in front of my PC ? there are various online petitions and movements I have joined that want answers and transparency re. various aspects of the covid pandemic.

[Boycie]

6 hours ago, ketteringram said:

Meanwhile, millions of people in China under new lockdown. So, are they doing that just for Omicron? Or something worse??

Omicron, the health secretary said so yesterday on t’radio.

Then said we were world beating at something or the other.

[Anon]

I'm absolutely certain that the good people at Pfizer are desperate to release the information this instant. If only the dastardly FDA would let them.

Pfizer are very confident in their test results. They must be, since they refused to let the Indian government test their vaccine. https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-india-pfizer-idUSKBN2A50GE

Edited March 15, 2022 by Anon

[sage]

Why are the cases going up so radpidly now?

It's not like the govt has relaxed the mask rule for purely political gain...oh wait

 

[Rev]

21 minutes ago, sage said:

Why are the cases going up so radpidly now?

It's not like the govt has relaxed the mask rule for purely political gain...oh wait

 

Deltacron.