Dr Carrie Madej: The mRNA Shots are Not Vaccines
Full interview with Dr Sheri Tenpenny: 8 Ways mRNA Vaccines can Kill You
JERUSALEM (Reuters) — Israel’s Health Ministry said on Sunday it is examining a small number of cases of heart inflammation in people who had received Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, though it has not yet drawn any conclusions.
Pfizer said it has not observed a higher rate of the condition than would normally be expected in the general population.
Israel’s pandemic response coordinator, Nachman Ash, said that a preliminary study showed “tens of incidents” of myocarditis occurring among more than 5 million vaccinated people, primarily after the second dose.
Ash said it was unclear whether this was unusually high and whether it was connected to the vaccine.
“The Health Ministry is currently examining whether there is an excess in morbidity (disease rate) and whether it can be attributed to the vaccines,” Ash said.
Ash, who spoke about the issue in a radio interview and during a news conference, referred to it as a “question mark”, and emphasized that the Health Ministry has yet to draw any conclusions.
Determining a link, he said, would be difficult because myocarditis, a condition that often goes away without complications, can be caused by a variety of viruses and a similar number of cases were reported in previous years.
Are Pfizer and Moderna misleading the public about the efficacy of their COVID vaccines by withholding the fact that there’s a better way to parse their data; one that has more real-world significance?
Examining a statistic called absolute risk reduction — the number of percentage points that an individual’s risk goes down if they do something “protective” — the two companies’ COVID vaccines barely make a dent at all, reducing someone’s risk of experiencing COVID symptoms (the clinical trials’ endpoint) by less than 1%. This is the practical number that people are likely to care about most.
Knowing the paltry real-world impact of the injections on someone’s risk of developing COVID symptoms, how many people swayed by the misleading “95% effective” mantra might instead have decided to refuse the vaccines; products that have revealed themselves to be highly unsafe and, in some cases, fatal?
Fear mongering, repeating propaganda, isolating, shaming, coercing, restricting, threatening, segregating, depriving, and now BRIBING for an experimental, unapproved, skipped animal testing, synthetic bioweapon producing, deadly, paralyzing, blood clot and heart attack and stroke causing INJECTED CONCOCTION that is actually less than 1% “effective” and not the statistically misleading 95% (relative risk reduction) that the lying media repeats to the masses AND to the medical professionals who then repeat it to their patients.
Read an in-depth analysis at The Defender:
What does 95% effective really mean?
What would any aware person think if the headlines about the Covid-19 vaccine clinical trials had read:
“Shot Reduces COVID-19 Risk by Less Than 1%” rather than “COVID-19 Shot 95% Effective”?
The answer to the question is obvious: There would be no long lines at the vaccination centers and the level of vaccine hesitancy would rise above the current 50+% that already exists among the informed, thoughtful, propaganda-resistant population.
Read on to see some of the reasons why people need not freak out if they can’t get one of Big Pharma’s experimental vaccines (which are still not proven to be safe - OR even effective –long-term.
______
In November 2020, Peter Doshi, MD, an associate editor with the British Medical Journal (The BMJ) wrote an important article that was published in his journal that debunked the propagandistic claim from Pfizer and Moderna (and widely propagated by the HHS, the NIH, the CDC, the NIAID, the FDA and even Anthony Fauci) that their fast-tracked, experimental vaccines were “95% effective”.
The truth of the matter is that the actual/absolute vaccine efficacy rates are actually less than 1%! The full article explaining the ruse is available at the following site:
In my opinion, some of the most pertinent information comes in the online comments that follow articles, especially in scientific articles. Below is one from the Doshi article.
"Please pay close attention to the graphs, which seem to be NEVER displayed, spoken of or published in mainstream media outlets; nor are the unwelcome truths illustrated in the graphs ever pointed out in the propagandistic advertisements that come far too often from public health departments and the CDC."
Her family said the 44-year-old was treated for blood clots days after her first jab. She died on Friday. The BBC Radio Newcastle presenter was not known to have any underlying health problems.
"She was treated by the RVI's [Royal Victoria Infirmary] intensive care team for blood clots and bleeding in her head.
"Tragically she passed away, surrounded by her family, on Friday afternoon. We are devastated and there is a Lisa-shaped hole in our lives that can never be filled. We will love and miss her always."
A distinctive type of blood clot is a known side effect of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine.
They are called cerebral venous sinus thromboses (CVSTs) and what makes them unusual is people often have low levels of platelets (the raw materials of clot) in their blood.
But all of medicine is a balance of risk and benefit; and the number of blood clots has already led to a shift in the vaccination campaign.
Ideally, adults under the age of 40 should be given an alternative vaccine, such as those developed by Pfizer or Moderna.