Jackson Jambalaya

Unabashed, anti-science rhetoric in the service of national political interests masquerading as local new reports. This is one of the many avenues that have allowed our peers to become brainwashed by propaganda.

The fourth paragraph says it all! How can Collins and Fauci say no gain-of-function research experiments were being done? No wonder Collins resigned! Fauci is complicit in lying to Congress, as is Collins.

no shit.

why is it that when the truth eventually comes out on a subject it's never as the democrats claimed or the media portrayed?

So an unintended side effect of an experiment proves gain of function research?

The report also states SARS-CoV-2 wasn’t created in the Wuhan lab.

Not sure what you’re getting at here Kingfish. You need to dumb your point down for your audience apparently.

What the fuck is this and how does it support what you are saying, doctor?

Anything politicized is purely for economics and power. All this over a fucking cold. But, remember to get your Flu vaccine, I did. The high dose.

If only Washington, and the rest of the world for that manner, had come to us in MS this would have been over several month ago.

I'm not a scientist, nor did I sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I'm starting to wonder if the whole "2 weeks to flatten the curve" was a fib, too.

Forget about it. It'll be at least 10 years before the truth comes out. Too much money is being spread around to even begin to upset this apple cart now.

Trust is a very fragile thing, shattered.

7:44 - Please tell us where you fit in the audience that could benefit from a 'dumber' explanation.

My takeaway is nothing more or less than Fauci lying about study participation since the letter clearly states otherwise.

What is yours?

@7:44a- No one is dumbing anything down.

Fauci could have been honest and clarified this to Congress, but HE DIDN’T. (Don’t even try to say he didn’t know.)

There’s no doubt the scientist(s) would have immediately reported their results and that the higher ups dictated the findings of their research to protect their funding. It’s highly likely that now either some scientists wanted to tell the truth or they collectively decided they weren’t going to burn as a result of Fauci’s lie… why else would they publish this better-late-than-never CYA letter? They were caught in their omission and had no choice but to come clean.

Fauci has been deceitful or backtracked on just about everything. It’s perplexing that people like you, who claim to be so superior in intelligence, believe him, his associates, and his labs without questions.

Maybe in another year we will actually know HALF the truth.

You can try to insult the readers by defending the liars to meet your political needs, but the truth is the truth. Hiding the truth makes you suspicious and untrustworthy. The NIH sending out this letter to cover their ass provides proof that FAUCI LIED TO CONGRESS! Yet here you are, defending the actions of the deceitful and completely missing the point.

P.S. At this point, anyone who believes ANY STATEMENTS regarding SARS-CoV-2 made from the Wuhan Lab is blind as f*#*!! These folks have not been forthcoming from the beginning. It’s unbelievably hilarious that you’re taking that statement at face value from the very letter covering their asses for a different lie!! How many lies/omissions will it take before your thinking cap actually turns on?

Geez, this issue is to distract and create distrust.

That's obvious because the " the horse left the barn". The first job is to corral the horse, not look at how he got out!

That was likely the moral dilemma facing Fauci et.al and much like saying " no" to masks in the beginning...weighing the consequences of telling the unvarnished truth to prevent a worse health outcome.

And, the " gain of function" issue is a bit more complex and thus more cloudy about what was known when by whom and whether it was relevant at all.

Did any of you actually read the grant application in question? And, if you did, you want to swear on the Bible that you understood it completely and there was no ambiguity ( as common in government grants)?

We really ALL need to stop wasting time and energy making mountains out of molehills.

@11:43am - I feel like I just read a Fox News article reading your comment. If only the experts would listen to folks like you, some redneck from Mississippi with maybe a high school diploma, all of this just a cold nonsense would have been over long ago.

Sooo, does this mean 'safe and effective' repeated millions of times by Fuchi may not be true either?
what about 'follow the science'?
What about vaccine reactions being 'rare and mild'?
What about 'no need for additional shots'?

Are you saying he is a serial liar?

Say it ain't so!

@1:58p- Is that all you have to offer… a Fox News shot?

I don’t watch Fox or CNN or MSN or OANN or ANY of them!! It’s all skewed.

Your “expert” argument is also DONE. Does your pea-brain even comprehend that this letter is your “experts” covering their asses from previously published lies regarding their study? Why do I need to be an expert of ANYTHING to comprehend that? This is not rocket science.

I’m sad for you, and any like-minded folks, that y’all don’t allow yourselves to think or learn anything. Being labeled an expert doesn’t mean you are the only people on Earth that can comprehend a particular subject matter. There are plenty of individuals in this country that understand more about some diseases/illnesses than any given scientist or doctor. Having a degree and experience isn’t equal to everyone else being ignorant.

And, no, dumbass, it wouldn’t be over. The vaccines’ efficacy has failed. Your new game is boosters. Your boosters will continually lose efficacy and won’t “make this be over” either.

Wanna know what could have actually quashed Covid-19 worldwide? The f*#%ing truth!! Truth from China. Truth from the Wuhan Lab. Truth from Gates’ and Fauci’s lying asses. The TRUTH could have prevented the pandemic. But instead, your lead “expert” Fauci chose to save his own ass. And you think “redneck Mississippians” are the problem…

One more post..
IF any of you so called doctors who still talk the love of Fauci, please tell me how this is not just pure f ing evil.

Follow/copy the link and see where Fauci tortured dogs for no damn reason other than his own sadistic pleasure.

These MOFO's are pure evil

Remember, use 'follow the science' and 'safe and effective' in your reply post.

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fchanging-america%2Fwell-being%2Fmedical-advances%2F578086-bipartisan-legislators-demand-answers-from-fauci&data=04%7C01%7C%7Cf703b70bfed04a90b3fc08d9965f17ee%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637706157445779666%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=%2FDP36P5spA3L%2B76XeUdsa5dgnLqCN4Sh9pyzMzEPLWk%3D&reserved=0

“Our investigators show that Fauci’s NIH division shipped part of a $375,800 grant to a lab in Tunisia to drug beagles and lock their heads in mesh cages filled with hungry sand flies so that the insects could eat them alive,” writes nonprofit organization the White Coat Waste Project. “They also locked beagles alone in cages in the desert overnight for nine consecutive nights to use them as bait to attract infectious sand flies.”

According to the White Coat Waste Project, the Food and Drug Administration does not require drugs to be tested on dogs, so the group is asking why the need for such testing.

White Coat Waste claims that 44 beagle puppies were used in a Tunisia, North Africa, laboratory, and some of the dogs had their vocal cords removed, allegedly so scientists could work without incessant barking

Kingfish will probably never post my comments again but any and I mean any of you tards who support these evil children of unmarried parents should rot in hell with them;

"Investigators Find MONSTER Fauci’s NIH Reportedly Gave $375K To Lab That Placed Live Beagle’s Heads In Cages Filled With Hungry Sand Flies That Ate Them Alive"

Y’all are fucking crazy….

'The first job is to corral the horse, not look at how he got out!'

Ahhh, not so, Grasshopper. In both Law and Medicine, the first job is to figure out whether you are complicit. The second job is to determine whether you will be found out. The third job is when you look for the horse.

LOOK! There's Fauci...standing on second base.

A guy falls off his roof while hanging Halloween decorations. His leg hurts so bad he is sure it is broken in several places. He goes to the ER. The ER doc orders film, examines him, and tells him he didn't break anything, but he did bang up his soft tissue pretty good. The guy goes home for a few hours and his leg still hurts. He is convinced his leg is broken so he goes to another ER.

As soon as the second ER attending walks in, the guy asks, "Doctor, is it possible for someone to break a bone if they fall off their roof?"

"Well, sure, of course...did you fall from your roof?" the doctor answers.

"AH HA! I knew that SOB was lying through his teeth!" shouts the idiot.

"What are you talking about? Who was lying?"

"That first doctor told me I didn't have a broken leg and you just told me I do!"

"Er, no I didn't, you asked if it was possible and I simply said it was. I haven't even examined you or looked at the film. But let's do that together right now...OK, here's the x-ray of your leg, and clearly, you don't have a broken leg."

"YOU ARE A DAMNED LYIN' BASTARD AND YOU DON'T KNOW SHIT! Anyone can see my whole shin bone is split in two right down the middle! You're just covering for each other and it's a conspiracy to rip me off! I asked all my friends on FaceTwitt before I came and every last one said they thought I a have a broke leg!"

That's what much of this nonsense sounds like to a doctor.

For anyone who actually cares about the facts, the NIH did not fund gain-of-function at any entity in Wuhan. Some of the research at various Wuhan-based entities was apparently done with less-than-ideal research and safety conditions and it is plausible that SARS-CoV-2 did accidentally "escape" from one of those entities, but as the letter states, it can be easily and readily determined whether one virus has been "created" from another. Nothing in this letter says anything about GOF, bad or good. Inserting a spike protein onto an existing, recently-discovered virus and testing it on specialized mice to determine the possibility of that unaltered virus for zoonotic transmission (in this case, from the bats to people) isn't GOF. There are 1000s of viruses that cannot transmit from one species to another, spike protein or not.

As to the "altered virus" aspect, think of it like this: if you have what appears to be a Tesla 4 door sedan and someone says, "That is really a gasoline-powered Ford F150 just converted into what appears to be a Tesla," it can be readily determined whether that is true or not. Simply saying that it must be true because both have 4 tires, 4 doors, seats, stereos, windshield wipers, etc. would be nonsense that any reasonable person would instantly reject as such. Much the same here. Saying that SARS-CoV-2 originated from this virus via GOF must be true because they are both bat viruses is nonsense.

Granted, the vast majority of people do not know anything at all about viruses so they cannot assess ridiculous claims about viruses with common sense or personal knowledge, but there are 1000s and 1000s of people around the world that do have the knowledge to do so. They have done just that and SARS-CoV-2 was not "created" from this virus, GOF or otherwise. Just like the F150-turned-Tesla example, it is not a case of, "Well, it's possible..." It is not possible. Period.

One thing anyone can reasonably do is objectively assess what they personally know about viruses. Strangely, those who claim the Chinese "made" this virus as a weapon are largely those who dismiss COVID-19's seriousness, are anti-vaccine, anti-mask, etc. The sad thing is that if this had been a weapon, it was a very poor one and had everyone actually done as advised, it would have been easily stopped well over a year ago.

8:46 wrote:

"'The first job is to corral the horse, not look at how he got out!'

Ahhh, not so, Grasshopper. In both Law and Medicine, the first job is to figure out whether you are complicit. The second job is to determine whether you will be found out. The third job is when you look for the horse."

No, it isn't. I have an extensive education in law and medicine/science and the original commenter is basically accurate and your comment is completely inaccurate nonsense. If you were on death's doorstep with extensive coronary blockage, would you prefer we commence cutting and saving you or would you rather we start an extensive study on your diet, lifestyle, your generics, possible exposure to dangerous products so your family could sue, etc. and since you'd be dead, see what the autopsy could tell us?

What kind of idiot still believes anything from Fruadci? Run get your genetically modified booster because the first 2 didn't work. Only 17,000+ deaths from the jab. Over 800,000 adverse reactions ... have fun with that. YOU can still get it, YOU can still spread it, YOU can still die from it. Get the jab today!

Grasshopper to ant:

Please note the cloud of ant killer being sprinkle down on you!

The first job was and is to contain the virus ( better testing and quarantine would have and would still been great to use if tests were easily, inexpensively and conveniently available for regular use) but we had to work with what we had and then masks that work had to go to the medical professionals on the front line first.

Under your theory, we'd need to study how the Japanese Zero's were so effective rather than taking protective and offensive measures to buy time to win the war.

Are you really THAT left brain limited? Your right side doesn't work at all?

Lordy, our real scientists who can see a larger picture might as well be trying to herd cats!

10:12 am Those who made A's in science classes that included viruses( and their histories), biology and genetics.

Also, those who made A's in math past high school apparently in some States, so they know the total number of vaccines given should be considered and compared, and who bothered to know that 800000 reactions include mild ones for hours or a few days with zero lasting effects.It's called benefits vs risks.

And, know that by your reasoning, no one would have taken penicillin ever! And, as a result, you've increased risks unnecessarily!

The house is on fire and you want to question whether or not the firemen know more than you do about how to put it out. How clueless can you be? And, you want to make it a personality issue as if ONE man controlled everything. You are clueless about how science or government works.

“ That's what much of this nonsense sounds like to a doctor”

As a public service, could you post where you are, or just post “safe and effective” on your practice name or door so people will know..
Just saying..

“Better testing and quarantine”, lol
By the way Sweden says hello…

@9:38am - Thank you. Problem is the rednecks that need to read it, won’t. And the rednecks that do will just tell “fake news” and “Fraudci”

Mississippi is such a sad, uneducated state.

@11:07a- The problems with your assertions of superior knowledge are:

1. No one is questioning the firemen’s expertise. The reality is that the arsonist who started the fire wants to dictate how to put it out. And let’s not forget how much wealth said arsonist earned from putting out his own fire. Let’s also not forget that the arsonist funded the environment for the fire to start in the first place.

2. Had there not been such a scramble to hide the truth in the beginning, it could have been a small kitchen fire versus the entire house burning to the ground. It should have been contained, but no, that was too “political.” Surely, with all those A’s you earned, you realize this.

3. You claim folks don’t understand how science and government work, yet YOU cannot see and acknowledge the twisted ties of Fauci. He is heavily intertwined in both, and the government is making decisions via chasing his “scientific” (flip-flopping) words. You focus the argument to us saying “one man is responsible.” We KNOW there are other players involved with Fauci, but HE is the common denominator amongst every single facet of direct involvement.

4. If the science is “so clear,” why is literally every country in the world handling the virus differently, yet achieving a variety of conflicting results. Or does your “science” only work your way in America?

5. The second you compared this vaccine to penicillin, you lost ALL credibility. There’s ABSOLUTELY no comparison in the development, testing, and distribution of the two.

Those of you with a “let’s just fix it” without any regard for “how it got broken” are the sheeple people laugh at. If you are naive enough to blindly follow a government and their scientists who care more about votes, egos, and funding above all else, there’s no helping you. To make it worse, you believe your blind-faith in government and science makes you intellectually superior. Lol, yeah, keep telling yourself that.

12:22PM wrote, "...The reality is that the arsonist who started the fire..."

That isn't "the reality." There is no arsonist and there was not any "arson." SARS-CoV-2 and its numerous mutations wasn't and isn't a man-made virus strain. Period. Not by Fauci, not by some Commie in China, not evil scientists hired by Bill Gates, not by anyone. It was a naturally-occurring bat virus that became a zoonosis/zoonotic, as have other viruses throughout human history. It is nothing terribly unusual or unknown. It was and is easily deactivated (you cannot "kill" a virus because it isn't "alive") and when it became zoonotic (transmittable to humans) it would have been pretty easy to contain. There is nothing particularly "special" about it, especially in the original strain. Thousands upon thousands of doctors and scientists around the world knew and know how to greatly reduce the rate of transmission and thousands of us told everyone we possibly could just how to do - wash your hands, practice distancing from others, learn to don and doff masks and wear them in public, etc. All which are also effective against "colds" and "flu," but the effects of those aren't as serious as COVID-19, so the results really aren't worth the efforts by everyone on the planet. It took about 2-3 weeks to develop an effective vaccine. The day development began, everyone involved knew there would be a minuscule number of people who would have a range of serious adverse reactions to certain components. The reason kids weren't early vaccine recipient candidates is that young people, males especially, had a minuscule chance of myocarditis (basically an inflammation of the heart) because - AHEM - it had been observed with other vaccines, including influenza and small pox vaccines. It was also known that even in the very rare instances of myocarditis, most of those were very mild, self-correcting cases. But because clinical observations of the infected indicated (accurately) that pediatric cases of COVID-19 were either mild or asymptomatic, the (right) decision was made to hold off vaccinating children until more clinical and research data became available. As has been confirmed, it is better for all to vaccinate kids and treat the very, very rare chance of myocarditis (if it even requires active treatment), i.e., just like small pox, polio, etc., the "reward" to/for everyone including the kids greatly outweighs the tiny risk.

As to "reactions" and death due to vaccinations of any kind including mRNA and vector vaccines, everyone who received any vaccine had a reaction. That is precisely the only primary point of giving a vaccine.

Part 2, next...

Part 2:

Many, even most, had what a layperson would correctly call "(an) adverse reaction(s)," including not feeling well for 24-48 hours, injection site discomfort, etc. Eating something and getting a mild case of food poisoning is "adverse." No one wants anything that will make them feel ill or even uncomfortable no matter how mildly so. But not feeling well for a day or two is not medically significant. As to deaths, there is no evidence that even a few dozen people have died as a result. Even if you completely misunderstand VAERS, in the first 6 months of 2021 there were less than 5000 "death events" reported. The vast majority of those were quickly and easily discounted as not vaccine-induced. That's because there is nothing in either type of vaccine that could cause that level of mortality. Numbers of deaths in the tens of thousands are not even possible because the very rare conditions that must exist to cause such numbers simply do not exist in the world population. In simple terms, someone claiming that peanut allergy kills millions of people each month would be instantly seen as nonsense because the allergy simply doesn't exist in that number of people. Similarly, a hundred people a day cannot die from gunshot wounds each day in Hinds County because a hundred people a day aren't shot or even grazed each day in Hinds County.

People raise all kinds of hell when medicine cannot "fix" their poor choices but when it can largely eliminate the majority of danger from a particular pathogen, many refuse to listen. Ivermectin is good example - it is fairly termed "a wonder drug," at least for its intended use(s) as an anti-parasitic.

Water, milk, juice, beer, wine, and even an occasional sugary soft drink are safe, enjoyable, and refreshing drinks in appropriate quantities and water is essential to human life. A human being can be injured or killed by the ingestion of too much water. All of those things make very poor fuel for cars and will likely cause some level of damage if that use is attempted. Ten gallons of milk in your car's gas tank is bad enough; twenty gallons won't be "better." Using the safe dosage of an anti-parasitic as an anti-viral is useless. Tripling the dosage is not only just as ineffective - just like adding more milk doesn't make it gasoline, more of an anti-parasitic doesn't convert it into an anti-viral - it is extremely dangerous. Much more risk to that than from a vaccine. Those are just the facts. There is no debate or argument possible. No amount of debate or argument will turn milk foolishly poured into a gas tank to gasoline. Even if you truly believe John and that Jesus turned water into wine, you are not Him and you cannot do it.

@3:01p- @12:22p here

On the flip side, thousands and thousands of doctors, nurses, and scientists have disagreed with Fauci, the government’s allowed treatments, and this vaccine’s distribution, and do you know how they were/have been/ are being “respected”? They were and are still being threatened with their licenses and livelihood if they spoke out/went against the government’s science. Does that sound like the “science” is beyond reproach?

Lol, I did skip down to the end of your second rant. None of us are pretending to be or channel Jesus or John. The hilarious part of that failed slam is that YOU actually believe your “science” will save us all. Lolololol.

Any doctor paying even minimal attention to Fauci, et al, knows damned well he has no interest in problem resolution or horses - only the extent to which he is compromised.

This has nothing to do with an operating room, Part 2, bats or autopsies. Fauci didn't get to be the highest paid man on the federal payroll by being a dwarf or stupid. He can cover tracks better'n Tonto and Scout.

Instead of dwelling on your lengthy diatribes, re-reread the opening exposé.

@ 3:02

Yeah, vaccine injuries are 'rare' for this 'safe and effective' vaccine (how many boosters are needed again?);

15,900 reported deaths
85,000 hospitalizations
752,000 AE's

I'm sure Maddie de Garay just had a tummy ache after taking the vaccine. Look her up

"Maddie, then 12 years old, received the first dose of experimental Pfizer mRNA in late December 2020. The second dose came on January 20, 2021. She was a clinical trial participant for Pfizer experiments on 12 to 15-year-olds at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital in a division aptly named the Gamble Vaccine Research Center. Stephanie’s bet on “science” cost young Maddie any semblance of a normal future."

Band keeps playing while the ship keeps sinking. Keep on keeping on, Mississippi.

LOL
“ Band keeps playing while the ship keeps sinking. Keep on keeping on, Mississippi.”

Do you realize the irony of your post referencing the titanic?

It sank due to its “leadership” going full speed ahead despite the warnings from other ships of danger ahead
and sank due to leaders arrogance, the ship was “safe and effective” and unsinkable. Sound familiar?

Rumor has it that some of them got on life boats pretending to be women to save themselves.

Mrs Fauci? Is that you?

Lol

"On the flip side, thousands and thousands of doctors, nurses, and scientists have disagreed with Fauci, the government’s allowed treatments, and this vaccine’s distribution..."

No, there are not "thousands and thousands" of doctors and "scientists" in relevant fields that have done any such thing. Your statement might appear to some to be a statement of fact but it is incorrect and misleading, typical of the BS from people with absolutely no knowledge of the relevant medicine or science.

First, "nurses" and "scientists" are very broad terms. While it is not incorrect to say that thousands of people to whom the term "nurse" could apply are "anti-vaccination," many, many more thousands (and especially those with any relevant education or practical experience) were eagerly awaiting vaccination and got vaccinated as soon as they could. Moreover, thousands of the "hesitant" group have changed their minds and been very vocal about their changed minds. The terms "nurse" and "scientist" are not indications of that person's level of education or even practical experience in relevant medicine and science. In very simple terms, there are thousands of "nurses," like LVN/LPNs, out there with no more knowledge or experience relevant to virology and vaccines than a plumber or average high school student. On the other hand, the vast majority of medical doctors, MD or DO, have had enough relevant training and education to understand at least the basics. The term "scientist" is, like "nurse," too broad a term to reasonably infer training, education, or practical experience in relevant medicine or science. A physicist could reasonably be called a "scientist" but have no more subject-matter relevant training or education than a plumber or LPN/LVN. Nurses, whether LPN/LVNs or APRNs, etc., are valuable members of any team but most do not have this relevant education or training. Notably, most trust the people that do have it.

The bottom line is (or should be), "What do people who actually have the relevant training, education, and experience think about these and other vaccines?" That answer is pretty clear and easily determined. There have been essentially no such people, out of the thousands upon thousands around the world, who have spoken out against vaccines. In fact, nearly all are very vocal about their support, to point of actively, immediately, and vocally responding to any attempt to misstate or mischaracterize their strong support.

Yes, there are a handful of "doctors" (if you torture the term "doctor" to mean anyone who managed to get through a med school and include PhDs in non-science fields) who have spoken out against vaccines. Most or all have been selling something and many are either under investigation or have been censured. One of the Mississippi doctors has been suspended from practice twice (well prior to COVID for serious violations of practice standards) and claimed he was primarily a pizza delivery person rather than a practicing doctor. I cannot think of a single one who has not been thoroughly discredited and their claims completely debunked. Even giving all possible benefit of doubt and allowing the "doctor" to include once-practicing doctors in completely unrelated fields, e.g., Rand Paul, a legitimate, once-practicing ophthalmologist, there are still highly unusual medical aspects in their careers, with Paul being no exception. I'll leave it to anyone interested to read up on his medical career - make sure to note his creation of the National Board of Ophthalmology and self-certifying himself. In any case, is it possible that a few practicing doctors are far outliers? Yes. I'm sure that one could find a plumber that actually believes shit goes uphill, chews their fingernails, and that thinks payday is Wednesday. If that's who you would want to work on your pipes, best of luck.

As to specific anecdotal examples, especially kids, you cannot "look it up." Generally, the only people who have the authority to release the medical records is the person or the child's parents. In the Maddie de Garay case, the parents (apparently) have not released them so they cannot be reviewed. There are people claiming - without supporting evidence - that the Pfizer vaccine caused her condition but without knowing more, that cannot be reasonably said. A review of available information suggests - but does not prove either way - that this case is a tragedy but it was not caused by a vaccine, with the caveat being that it is possible that she was a singularly rare case with a previously unknown and unobserved condition that precipitated such a reaction. Unfortunately, that is true of anything, from food items to medicinals. Common things like peanuts and aspirin can cause serious, even fatal, reactions in small numbers of people. That is just an unfortunate fact of life, science, and medicine. Even if it were possible to make every possible substance that could possibly harm even a singular human disappear immediately, that would end humankind in less than a month because among the things that can do harm is plain old water.

That said, it is possible that a tiny number of children and adults have had or will have a medically-significant adverse reaction to some component of any vaccine (or any other complex compound)? Yes. It is not only "possible," in the case of all current vaccines, it is a medical certainty. There were and are tiny numbers of severe reactions to small pox, "flu," etc. vaccines, so similar reactions in similar numbers was and is expected from COVID and future vaccines of similar construct. There are adverse reactions to anesthesia administered in the course of immediately-necessary and what would be life-saving surgery. Conversely, there are similarly anecdotal examples of people who have survived things that should have killed them - parachutes not opening and multiple gunshot wounds as well-known examples. That does not mean that no one should receive anesthesia or that jumping from airplanes without a parachute or being shot multiple times is safe.

Just like with every other source of potential danger, society does what it must to survive; a risk-vs-reward analysis is done and if the "reward" - a much healthier society - is vastly greater than the infinitesimal risk, the path is obvious to any sensible person. The horrors or small pox and polio vastly outweigh the tiny risk to vaccinations, so society vaccinates. The serious damage done by COVID-19 is vastly reduced by vaccines and the risk from them is infinitesimally small, so sensible people get vaccinated. At this point, anyone who says that COVID-19 is no big deal is a liar or an idiot.

I see nothing in this letter that suggests that a virus naturally occurring in bats was altered for this experiment.

"15,900 reported deaths
85,000 hospitalizations
752,000 AE's"

If this is meant to be numbers related to vaccinations, it is pure horsehit. It is not debatable, period. Anyone who posts, says, relays, or believes such nonsense (or claims to do so) is either an idiot or a liar. If they are doing so to sell something or otherwise obtain financial reward, they ought to be criminally prosecuted and the punishment upon conviction should be Draconian.

There is nothing in common vaccines - COVID mRNA or vector, or other common vaccine - that could produce those numbers. Moreover, if there was any possibility of such numbers it would be readily and immediately - within seconds - obvious to innumerable doctors and researchers around the world. The only possibility, and it is obviously ridiculous, is that every single one is part of a conspiracy to hide that information. Profession aside, any marginally sane person knows that many people, doctors or ditchdiggers, from age 6 to 96, couldn't keep such a secret for 18 seconds much less 18 months.

Moreover still, there is not and never has been any attempts made to "hide" or control access to the vaccines. Anyone could easily get a vial of each vaccine and while not anyone could test it, it would not be difficult or expensive to have it tested for potential toxicity as a compound and on a component level. Those making millions by shilling nonsense "cures" and "treatments" could exponentially increase their ill-gotten gains with such testing and yet, not a single one has produced anything. The absolute lack of such factual (rather than alleged and conjectural) repudiation ought to tell anyone regardless of specific relevant medical knowledge there is no such repudiation possible.

@9:14
“ There are adverse reactions to anesthesia administered in the course of immediately-necessary and what would be life-saving surgery. ”

So, do you perform “life saving surgery” on someone who has a 99.7% chance of recovery without the surgery?
Hmm
Asking for a friend…

@8:27a-

The bottom line is (or should be), "What do people who actually have the relevant training, education, and experience think about these and other vaccines?" That answer is pretty clear and easily determined. There have been essentially no such people, out of the thousands upon thousands around the world, who have spoken out against vaccines.

It’s clear your thoughts are dictated by mainstream media.

Your entire post is essentially a puff piece. There is a multitude of evidence to the contrary, yet you stand there, on your soapbox, belittling anyone you can, thinking you are superior in knowledge. It’s actually quite comical.

P.S.- Thanks for the Rand Paul jab, as I couldn’t care less what he thinks. Despite you liberal-hotheads’ believing that anyone conservative is seeking, following, or waiting for guidance from the likes of Paul, Reeves, and/or Trump, proves you are a government-dependent thinker. There are MANY of us who don’t need the government or its representatives’ input to learn and make decisions. It’s liberating!! You should try it!

P.S.S.- Funny thing about plumbing is essentially anyone with any form of common sense can do it. There are millions of us in this world who never have to hire a plumber at all. I know this must be shocking to you. I’ll be sure to send your wishes of good luck to the hubs.

"There is a multitude of evidence to the contrary, yet you stand there, on your soapbox, belittling anyone you can, thinking you are superior in knowledge. It’s actually quite comical."

No, it isn't "comical" in the least when people post (and are allowed to post) seriously wrong information about very serious issues that affect the public health. You cannot cite any of this supposed "multitude of evidence to the contrary" because it does not exist. Keep in mind that just because "someone said it" and you found it online does not make it "evidence." These anecdotal stories are a good example - just because parents claim, sincerely or not, there is a link between A and B does not make it evidence of a link. It would seem they would want the records reviewed by as many as possible in case there was a link but if they do not allow anyone to review them, there can be nothing substantive derived from the case. All that can be said is that from the sparse second-hand information about the case and the vast amount of lab/research, clinical, pathological, etc. data and information available, this does not appear to be in any way vaccine-related. About the only thing available information confirms (and all reasonable people already knew it) is that it is tragic when anyone, especially children, suffer debilitating conditions.

PS - I'll put my degrees and continuing education including formal, informal, and collegial (that means I know a lot more people with relevant education, etc., than you do), along with my many years of real-world experience, up against anyone. Even a plumber.

@ 10:03

“ WOW! UK School Director Admits on National TV that 30 Kids Are Out with COVID and 14 Are Out with Vaccine Side Effects “

Every time you post, your wrong.

"So, do you perform 'life saving surgery' on someone who has a 99.7% chance of recovery without the surgery?
Hmm"

Proof-positive that you have no idea - absolutely none - of anything relating to medicine or the practice of it.

And if the "99.7% chance" is based upon the wholly-fictitious claims by the misinformed that 99.7% of COVID-19 cases are survived, it is wrong on its face but it is also wrong and misleading as to its implications. The death rate of COVID-19 is closer to 2% overall, but more importantly, the death/survival rate isn't the most appropriate metric for things like COVID-19. That is because of the entirety of the effects on the people with it. People regularly suffer very serious illnesses and horrendous physical injuries and survive. To suggest or say that because they survived, the illnesses or injuries were not so bad is wrong, ridiculous, and offensive.

But even if it were true that "99.7%" of COVID-19 sufferers survived, the number of deaths due to vaccinations for it are several orders of magnitude lower. So even using your completely false number AND further assuming it is a binary outcome (and it is most certainly not a binary outcome) in which the survivors have absolutely no short- or long-term effects, vaccination is still a much better "risk" than the disease it helps prevent. Moreover, with the vaccines, the infinitesimally small number of medically-significant reactions are known, easily recognizable, and the vast majority are readily treatable with no long-lasted effects.

People can make up all sorts of things in an attempt to discredit vaccines but there is simply no real, correct number or metric that actually contraindicates vaccination against COVID-19. Even on a cold and purely objective numbers/percentages/cost (money only, excepting the human condition cost), vaccinations are less risky than COVID-19 even in very small random cohorts. In other words, if 2 groups each of randomly-selected 1000 people were selected, one group was vaccinated, and the members of both groups developed COVID-19, the vaccinated group would be better off - by the numbers, both actual and even by your wrong 99.7% - than the non-vaccinated group. Plus, the chances of one, much less more than one, of the vaccinated group being one of the very rare few who have conditions that would make them susceptible to any medically-significant reaction to the vaccine are basically statistically zero and the chances one or more would have a condition that would make the vaccine life-threatening are basically zero in the practical sense. And on top of it all, many, even most, of that very tiny number that could have a reaction of any degree medically-significance are already known or identifiable.

As the real-world, on-the-ground clinical data has proven, the odds of winning a couple of consecutive Powerball jackpots with a single ticket each are greater than a person with no previous indicators receiving any vaccine (COVID-19, small pox, etc.) and having any medically-significant serious reaction, much less dying.

The conditions necessary for such reactions are just too rare in the population to allow for such numbers. It is impossible for more people to die in plane crashes than there are people involved in plane crashes. You cannot die from or even be injured by a gunshot wound if you haven't suffered one. It is impossible for thousands or tens of thousands of people to die from or even suffer from something that requires a prerequisite condition they don't have and never had.

@1:05p- Yeah, no, this has seriously gotten comical.

Do you even understand why this post originated? Your overly-educated science community LIED (purposeful omission is just as much of a lie) about their published findings.

I cannot even take you seriously. Every single week more evidence comes out contradicting your claims and you still refuse to even try to enlighten yourself. I'm not spoon-feeding your arrogant ass. You claim to be so educated but seem to seriously lack the ability to look beyond what is shot up your feeding tube.

Great job there attacking parents. The families DO WANT research done and the connection(s) proven. You are ridiculously misinformed if you think it's the parents and families refusing the research. Who the f@#$ told you the families are refusing... CNN? Fauci? Seriously, there's no way you can believe this?!

I literally know of a local family who just lost someone to a heart condition, with ZERO previous issues, one day after their booster. And there's been ZERO cooperation from the providers to look into this. There are THOUSANDS of stories like this that NO ONE is investigating.

Ha, no one needs your degrees, continuing education, or name-dropping to understand the truth. Get over yourself!!

@3:20 (Or Mrs Fauci if you prefer)

Damn! 14 powerball winners in the UK! What a coincidence!

PS Maggie de Daray says she won the powerball too, will you deliver her money?

"As the real-world, on-the-ground clinical data has proven, the odds of winning a couple of consecutive Powerball jackpots with a single ticket each are greater than a person with no previous indicators receiving any vaccine (COVID-19, small pox, etc.) and having any medically-significant serious reaction, much less dying."

@10:03
@3:29pm

OMG! The conspiracy of these people!!
Can’t they see what St Fauci sees!!

Gypsies- Liars, tramps and thieves!

“Sweden Suspends Moderna Shot Indefinitely After Vaxxed Patients Develop Crippling Heart Condition”
So nice I’ll say it twice!

Sweden Suspends Moderna Shot Indefinitely After Vaxxed Patients Develop Crippling Heart Condition

Damn these plumbers trying to be an elite doctor like me!!
Don’t they know I made an “A” in my MCAT?

@.. aw heck, you know who you are…
Yep it’s all about @health” and “follow the science”
Lol

“ Visitors from 50 countries with low levels of vaccine availability will NOT need to be vaccinated to travel to US from Nov 8”

“Sweden Suspends Moderna Shot Indefinitely After Vaxxed Patients Develop Crippling Heart Condition”

Not exactly on the former and not even close on the latter. Sweden suspended the Moderna vaccine _only for those 30 and under_ but no other vaccines until December because it was awaiting its own health officials to rule on the "very slight risk" of the "very rare possibility" of myocarditis and pericarditis in younger males. Moderna is still approved and recommended for those over 30 and not a single person has died or even had serious complications. Further, the Swedish health agency made clear that it was an "abundance of caution" move done because it would not interfere with vaccinations since there were other vaccines, Pfizer and Spikevax, for which they reiterated their recommendation for all people ages 12 and up.

Denmark also suspended Moderna, _only for those 18 and under_, and issued a similar statement noting that heart inflammation is an extremely rare side effect which often goes away on its own, while also reiterating the need for vaccination and also continuing with Pfizer and Spikevax for all and Moderna for those over 18.

Again, this extremely rare and largely self-correcting potential side effect was a known and recognized factor - from the inert carrier components and not the immunization component - the day COVID-19 vaccine development began.

A number of doctors in Sweden and Denmark have indicated it is really something to do with politics, but fair enough, Sweden and Denmark are the standard(s) you endorse and recommend for all. For males between 12 and either 18 or 30, get the Pfizer vaccine and if you are female or a male over 18 or 30, get whichever vaccine you can get soonest. We can all live a little easier if you and the rest of the idiots would just listen to, er, you, along with Sweden and Denmark.

@ 3:20,

it's me, the neighborhood plumber again.

BMJ

"The second critical risk is underestimating a product’s side effects. A year after novel vaccines were manufactured and rolled out on expedited timelines to tackle the threat of 2009 H1N1 swine flu, post-marketing reports of narcolepsy emerged in some Pandemrix vaccine recipients.

But it would take a further seven years—and a lawsuit—to unearth internal pharmacovigilance reports by the manufacturer, which had suggested that problems with the vaccine’s safety had actually been produced in real time during the pandemic.13

Copious evidence already shows that adverse event data collected in trials are under-reported in journal publications.14 Moreover, serious adverse events may disappear if classified under rubrics such as “intercurrent illness” or “new medical histories,” which do not require serious adverse event reports—as has happened in vaccine and treatment trials.1516
^^^^^((are talking directly to you 3:20?))^^^^^

Only publicly available full datasets will allow for a thorough assessment of side effects."

6:39AM wrote,

"BMJ - 'The second critical risk is underestimating a product’s side effects...'"

I have mentioned a couple of times that doctors, PhDs, to some extent lawyers, and others in fields with a lot of research, citations, etc. can instantly spot those who have no idea about what they are reading but cut and paste out-of-context quotes and if they mention the source at all, it is clearly made by someone who has no familiarity with any of it, content or citations. This is a great example of that very thing.

First, for anyone wanting to try to follow along, here is the proper citation: BMJ 2020;370:m3260 and it should be available here: doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3260 (Published 24 August 2020)

That said, the snippet quoted is from "Head to Head," a debate section in The BMJ (FKA/AKA British Medical Journal, a generally well-regarded for-profit "trade publication").

The primary "No," Peter Doshi, is/was an editor for BMJ and has written several pieces about research data transparency. I will not disagree with him - to a point. That introduces one problem with "information." When people who have no education or experience with a particular subject (medicine, auto repair, whatever) take bits and pieces of subject-matter specific information in subject-matter specific language, and misunderstand/misread it, that is bad enough. But when they pass their misunderstanding along to others who further misunderstand the misunderstood snippets, it creates a dangerous feedback loop ala COVID-19, vaccines, etc.

There are a lot of moving parts to "transparency," not the least of which is what does "transparency" mean, to whom? "Transparent" to subject-matter trained and educated doctors and researchers? To most MDs or PhDs in a medically-focused field? Undergraduate science profs or students? High school science teachers or students? Anyone with an 8th grade education? Another group of related issues are the time and cost to produce "data" that is "transparent" whatever it might mean but also redacted for all patient ID information (for those who don't like that, fuss mostly at lawmakers not doctors or researchers). Even if a general consensus on transparency was reached, and the redaction requirements issue resolved, what about usage guidelines/restrictions on (mis)use of data? Would providers have recourse against any (mis)use, i.e., could company A use expensive-to-produce-and-release data from company B for its own profits? Would a misrepresentation be subject to some type of sanctions? Who would administer or enforce restrictions on use? As Johnson points out, is a worldwide pandemic the time to insist on perfection in data "transparency," whatever it might mean? I would suggest, and many doctors and scientists have said the same thing, this is all or mostly politics rather than science or medicine.

That said, there some serious issues with aspects of medical and pharmacologic research. Pharma companies, large and small, sometimes put profit ahead of science and the public when dealing with highly-confidential patent meds that mean the difference between billions in profit or billions in loss. But with COVID-19 and vaccines, there simply is no way to "hide" anything significant. There are just too many people with too much data about things that just aren't that complex or unknown. Moreover, there is no "profit vs loss" incentive for the guaranteed-profit vaccine companies. The incentive is actually an "all profit, no loss" for various "off-label" drugs which show no efficacy and are often dangerous - much more so than the vaccines - to use for COVID-19, regardless of their efficacy for the approved use(s).

@11:33 am
Glad you see he was correct;

"The primary "No," Peter Doshi, is/was an editor for BMJ and has written several pieces about research data transparency. I will not disagree with him - to a point."

Here are where your true elitist colors shine through;

"There are a lot of moving parts to "transparency," not the least of which is what does "transparency" mean, to whom? "Transparent" to subject-matter trained and educated doctors and researchers? To most MDs or PhDs in a medically-focused field? Undergraduate science profs or students? High school science teachers or students? Anyone with an 8th grade education?"

Who are you to determine what information is good for the 'rubes', sounds a lot like the mantras you chant; 'safe and effective', or '2 weeks to flatten the curve' or 'no need for more shots' or 'prevents infection and transmission'.

I think the great Fauci calls it the 'Noble lie" (to the rubes), seems like you like that idea too.

I won't write a dissertation (hint hint), I've got to go, the plumbing business is booming with all the bloviating you've contributed.

May the 'safe and effective' force be with you!

@ 11:33 am
I lied, here is my dissertation (but it is a noble lie);

"When experts or agencies deliver information to the public that they consider possibly or definitively false to further a larger, often well-meaning agenda, they are telling what is called a noble lie. Although the teller’s intentions may be pure—for example, a feeling of urgency that behavioral change is needed among the lay public—the consequences can undermine not only those intentions but also public trust in experts and science. During the first year of COVID-19, leaders were faced with an unknown disease amid a politically sensitive election in the era of social media, and the preconditions for noble lies became especially fertile. Not surprisingly, we witnessed several examples. More than anything, these examples illustrate the destructive potential of such lies.

Later in 2020, Fauci participated in a second noble lie. In December, he explained in a phone interview with then–New York Times reporter Donald McNeil that he had been moving the target estimate for herd immunity based in part on emerging studies. But he also said:
""When polls said only about half of all Americans would take a vaccine, I was saying herd immunity would take 70 to 75 percent. Then, when newer surveys said 60 percent or more would take it, I thought, “I can nudge this up a bit,” so I went to 80, 85.


In his own words, he “nudged” his target range for herd immunity to promote vaccine uptake. Even though his comments were made to influence public actions to get more people vaccinated (a noble effort), the central dilemma remains: Do we want public health officials to report facts and uncertainties transparently? Or do we want them to shape information, via nudges, to influence the public to take specific actions? "