Study: 74% of 'Covid' deaths directly linked to the vaxx - Politics Discussion

[–] B1cKsurN (17405) 5 months ago

Prevax 95% of covid deaths were WITH the virus.

So has anyone actually died directly from covid being sick at home, unvaxxed, and unmedicated?

I'm guessing no.

reply

[–] Sparky (2582) 5 months ago

Some still defend this poison vociferously. "It's easier to fool someone than to convince them they've been fooled."- Twain-esque

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

[deleted]

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

>So has anyone actually died directly from covid being sick at home, unvaxxed, and unmedicated?

Almost certainly, yes. Many COVID deaths were with (a complication), but many were not.

reply

[–] tvfan (12729) 5 months ago

There's a difference between "with" and "from" ... they still haven't proved that anyone has died from the covid while unvaxxed/unmedicated.

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

I know there is. But still plenty of people did also die /from/ covid.

How would someone sufficiently prove it to you? You want to personally be present at autopsies?

reply

[–] B1cKsurN (17405) 5 months ago

CDC admitted it, that proof enough for me.

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

CDC admitted that EVERY SINGLE covid death was "with" and not "from", did they?

reply

[–] B1cKsurN (17405) 5 months ago

Covid will be the first respiratory illness since pneumonia that gets the credit for the death when exacerbating the real problem, because they don't credit deaths exacerbated by the flu to the flu!

SCAMdemic.

reply

[–] DarthAckbar (2039) 5 months ago

LOL!

reply

[–] Bossdog677 (1553) 5 months ago

Where's all the mad liberals at to debunk you and call you a Horse?

reply

[–] tvfan (12729) 5 months ago

They are still waiting for the Fact Checkers to be posted. lol

reply

[–] Bossdog677 (1553) 5 months ago

Waiting on their orders huh? Then they'll be everywhere like a bunch of parrots

reply

[–] tvfan (12729) 5 months ago

I saw that a couple of days ago. The Lancet censored it or took it down within a few hours.

22+ million deaths and counting, attributed to the vaxx.

"Dr. Francis Boyle, the architect of the 1989 Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act, has issued an affidavit declaring COVID-19 mRNA vaccines as biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction."

reply

[–] Sparky (2582) 5 months ago

Yeah since then it has been peer reviewed. IIRC some countries are also calling it a biological weapon.

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

What countries are calling it a biological weapon?

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 5 months ago

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8300139/

Although the United States, Russia, United Kingdom, Syria, Japan, and Iraq have had bioweapon programs in the past, China and Iran have never admitted to a developed program,12,13,15 although small-scale production is certainly possible. The US Department of State’s 2020 Compliance Report notes, “The United States does not have sufficient information to determine whether China eliminated its assessed biological warfare program, as required under Article II of the Convention.”14 Still, the historical effect of bioweapons pales in comparison to the devastation of COVID-19.

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

That's not what I asked.

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 5 months ago

https://www.britannica.com/technology/biological-weapon/Biological-weapons-in-history

Pre-20th-century use of biological weapons
One of the first recorded uses of biological warfare occurred in 1347, when Mongol forces are reported to have catapulted plague-infested bodies over the walls into the Black Sea port of Caffa (now Feodosiya, Ukraine), at that time a Genoese trade centre in the Crimean Peninsula. Some historians believe that ships from the besieged city returned to Italy with the plague, starting the Black Death pandemic that swept through Europe over the next four years and killed some 25 million people (about one-third of the population).

In 1710 a Russian army fighting Swedish forces barricaded in Reval (now Tallinn, Estonia) also hurled plague-infested corpses over the city’s walls. In 1763 British troops besieged at Fort Pitt (now Pittsburgh) during Pontiac’s Rebellion passed blankets infected with smallpox virus to the Indians, causing a devastating epidemic among their ranks.

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

So you're back to just behaving like a child again.

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 5 months ago

I love pwning you!

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

"pwning"? Is it 2010? "Haha I make stupid comments and that's a win" somehow

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/738/025/db0.jpg

Just this meme

reply

[–] tvfan (12729) 5 months ago

Yup, I saw that it was peer reviewed.

I'm waiting to see what nonsense excuse the fact checkers will use to cover for it.

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 5 months ago

yeah, the left will spin this somehow by attacking the scientists most likely.

reply

[–] tvfan (12729) 5 months ago

Of course they will.

I saw where a couple of knuckleheads attacked the credibility of Doyle for declaring the vaxx as a bio weapon.

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

Aren't you the same poster who dismisses most scientists on earth for being paid off?

reply

[–] B1cKsurN (17405) 5 months ago

It's easy to pay off people when you can print endless money!

But threatening livelihoods works just as well, if not better than paying them off. 🤔🤔🤔

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

So any scientist who disagrees with you = paid off

Any scientist who agrees with you = perfect, honest, accurate

Am i getting that right?

reply

[–] B1cKsurN (17405) 5 months ago

So any scientist who disagrees with you = paid off

Classic Skavau sleight of hand...it doesn't work on me, Bro!! I've told you this!

ANYWAYS...

Threating to take away one's license to practice medicine is much much more effective than paying someone off, and it actually works. How many doctors are willing to risk 8 years of school and potential residency/own practice??

I'm betting not many.

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

It's the conclusion that you would naturally come to. You are implying that any scientist who publicly disagrees with you about Covid/vaccines/other things doesn't really think it, and they were just paid off or threatened by some nefarious group to say otherwise. Given that the vast majority of the scientific world disagrees with you, this means you think almost every scientist is essenially compromised.

reply

[–] tvfan (12729) 5 months ago

Yup, some doctors, physicians and nurses lost their practicing licenses for not going along with the plandemic/vaxx narrative while others were ridiculed, discredited, demonized and cancelled for it.

Same as the many that lost their jobs because they refused the jab.

reply

[–] B1cKsurN (17405) 5 months ago

Yup... why lose money paying off someone that can talk anyway, when you can just threaten to take away their literal life...or threaten family members.

It's so easy, and these morons somehow think it's hard to get large amounts of people to do something you want. Ignorance truly is bliss.

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

This is about deaths after the COVID vaccination, not deaths from COVID by people who have been vaccinated. It literally says:

"We searched PubMed and ScienceDirect for all published autopsy and necropsy reports relating to COVID-19 vaccination up until May 18th, 2023." "All autopsy and necropsy studies that included COVID-19 vaccination as an antecedent exposure were included."

So it's specifically investigating reports that reference COVID vaccination.

reply

[–] Thaisticks (3020) 5 months ago

Bogus article. N.B.: The authors "are affiliated with and receive salary support and/or hold equity positions in The Wellness Company, Boca Raton, FL." N.B.: Number of cross-citations of this article? Zero.

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 5 months ago

another conspiracy theorist I see, its time to take off that tin foil hat.

reply

[–] Filmtenk2 (4039) 5 months ago

That's not conspiracy paranoia it's media literacy. Something too many on MC forums lack. Schools failed you. The internet where all the proof you need to support your narrative, whether true or false, failed you.

reply

[–] B1cKsurN (17405) 5 months ago

media literacy

🤣😂🤣😂🤣 I stopped right there.

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 5 months ago

I was told the internet was a great resource for truth and justice. was I told wrong?

https://sadanduseless.b-cdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/tin-foil-cats4.jpg

this is liberals today. lol

reply

[–] Bossdog677 (1553) 5 months ago

I watched a YouTube Video the other day of a guy Talkies about something he has no interest in just to see the Ads pop up immediately after.

Some guy in the comments said "Sometimes I just think things and they appear" and I realized I have too.

So I tested it and thought about something I know I never looked up or talked about. I closed my eyes and I seen all the birds in the backyard where I work and I thought on my head and my head only "There is a lot of birds in the backyard downtown, I'd like to get some cool houses for them and maybe set up a little flower display or maybe even get one of them big bird cages and be like Alcatraz"

I thought this on my head over and over for like 5 minutes straight then went onto a random article on NBC News and low and behold I got a Temu Ad for Birdhouses, a giant bird cage, a flower display, flamingo statues and a big bird wall"

Suddenly a Tin Foil Hat was seemingly Sensible.

reply

[–] Filmtenk2 (4039) 5 months ago

That's odd and I can't even begin to come up with an explanation if what you say happened is true.

Our phones on the other hand are definitely without a doubt 100% listening to us and targeting us with ads. I feel like it's the Wild West of data mining and if we're lucky some day people will look back and wonder how the hell this was legal and why did we allow it to go on so long without stopping it.

reply

[–] JoWilli (19957) 5 months ago

the unvaxxed will be all thats left by 2050.

reply

[–] Filmtenk2 (4039) 5 months ago

Did no one die from Covid before the vaccines?

reply

[–] B1cKsurN (17405) 5 months ago

A few. CDC published a statement in very early 2021 that roughly 95% of the recorded "Covid Deaths" were WITH the virus and not FROM it. The ones that allegedly died FROM it, were put on ventilators, and pumped full of Remdesivir which liquifies your organs and kills you.

That was hospital protocol... not anything that would actually help you, but a organ-destroying drug. Nothing about the scamdemic makes sense.

reply

[–] tvfan (12729) 5 months ago

They basically used the Ventilators and Remdesivir to commit mass murder.

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

I'll await evidence that they used those ventilators deliberately specifically to kill people who had COVID.

reply

[–] B1cKsurN (17405) 5 months ago

I personally know someone that happened to. I'm convinced he would have been okay had he just stayed home and fought through it.

reply

[–] tvfan (12729) 5 months ago

The more patients they killed the more money they made (incentives).

Their hospital protocols have killed 500K+ Americans (Lockdowns, Ventilators and Remdesivir).

Sooner or later, someone will be held accountable:
https://x.com/BGatesIsaPyscho/status/1805310079043764644

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

Can I see evidence please that doctors were being paid to kill people?

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

Note also that dying /with/ does not mean that COVID was not contributory to the death. What CDC link are you referring to?

reply

[–] B1cKsurN (17405) 5 months ago

Falling off a roof and dying sick isn't a covid death.

Covid, like the flu, can exacerbate a previous condition and speed up the inevitable death. Now, BEFORE covid...when that happened, and it wasn't pneumonia, the death was NEVER credited to influenza...but the actual condition the flu made worse.

This practice was completely reversed for covid...WHY?

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

>Falling off a roof and dying sick isn't a covid death.

I didn't say it was.

>Covid, like the flu, can exacerbate a previous condition and speed up the inevitable death. Now, BEFORE covid...when that happened, and it wasn't pneumonia, the death was NEVER credited to influenza...but the actual condition the flu made worse.

Right, COVID, for a time was spreading through the population and exacerbating conditions with far more regularity and seriousness than the flu does. How the data is recorded doesn't change that.

reply

[–] tvfan (12729) 5 months ago

How the data is recorded doesn't change that.

It does when that data is deliberately manipulated to reflect that it was “from” instead of “with”, something that didn’t occur with the flu prior to covid.

The covid is basically a relabeled variant of the flu.

reply

[–] Skavau (15993) 5 months ago

>The covid is basically a relabeled variant of the flu.

It is not a form of flu at all. Provide evidence for this claim please.

reply

[–] B1cKsurN (17405) 5 months ago

Technically covid is a coronavirus, so its more related to the common cold, than the flu.

reply

[–] tvfan (12729) 5 months ago

I know, but I went by this WHO chart for the simplification that the flu was rebranded/relabeled/substituted with covid.

https://i.postimg.cc/XJF1Ykvp/Flu-vs-Covid.png

reply

[–] zeesha (1826) 5 months ago

The article never claimed that “74% of COVID-19 deaths...”

What it actually said is: "A total of 240 deaths (73.9%) were independently adjudicated as directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination".

Potential issues with this study:

1. Causality vs. Correlation: The study suggests a causal link between vaccination and death, but temporal association alone does not prove causation. Other factors could contribute to the observed outcomes.

2. Selection Bias: The study reviews autopsy cases likely selected due to suspicion of vaccine-related deaths, which might not represent the general vaccinated population.

3. Lack of Control Group: The study lacks a comparison with unvaccinated individuals who died similarly, making it difficult to determine if the observed effects are unique to vaccination.

4. Confounding Variables: Factors like age, pre-existing conditions, and recent COVID-19 infections are not adequately controlled, which could influence the results.

5. Pathological Interpretation: Autopsy findings can be subjective and vary between pathologists, potentially leading to inconsistent conclusions about the cause of death.

6. Reporting Bias: Adverse effects are more likely to be reported and published, possibly exaggerating the perceived risks associated with vaccination.

reply

[–] tvfan (12729) 5 months ago

If they were not concerned about any of those potential issues, Big Pharma would not have buried the peer review paper/report after it was published though "the Lancet."

reply

[–] Sparky (2582) 5 months ago

Uh oh- better go get the newest booster then, and your family also.

reply