Many high court case Astrazenecca The real deception is that...

  1. 887 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 2907
    Many high court case Astrazenecca

    The real deception is that "efficacy" of all Covid vaccines was based on relative, rather than absolute, risk reduction. Very few recipients could have given informed consent. The TGA made it clear it was a real-world clinical trial. Vaccine-injured people could (and should IMO) look into suing employers, educational institutions and clinics and pharmacies where they got injected.

    In October 2021, I marched into one pharmacy near my home in Melbourne I chose at random, and asked to speak to the pharmacist. I said, "I'm looking into these Covid jabs. Have ya had any DEATHS?" The pharmacist looked away and said, "No" but didn't believe her. She went into damage control and told me most of their clients were elderly and "most came back for the second dose". (I didn't even know it was an issue at that time but I later found out that as many as 100 000 Israelis didn't go back for the second dose!) She told me one man in his late 20s came back to say he wasn't going to get a second dose "because of swollen heart". So I happened to hit a tiny pharmacy, not attached to a medical centre, with one of the "rare" cases of heart damage?

    I've passed high quality studies and local "coincidences" to cardiologists in the Melbourne via a friend. We told they can contact a candiologist who's treating two young men who are friends who got myocarditis after Pfizer. The cases have been reported to the TGA. Neither is mild and transient. One of these young men has an older friend of the family who also got myocarditis. Last time I saw his mother, she was worried her son wouldn't get a permanent exemption from the second dose! I've given links here previously to interviews with two young women whose hearts were damaged after Pfizer who STILL couldn't get an exemption for the second dose.

    I don't understand why this total abandonment of ethics doesn't disgust everyone.

    My mother in the UK said she read about the Astrazenecca court case in "the news" and she's glad she had Pfizer. I reminded her that following Pfizer and Moderna shots, she's had three medical "coincidences" this year - a minor stroke and two severe respiratory infections but, due to significant memory loss since her latest jabs, she can't remember. I told her AZ was the least of the evils to wait until the "news" hits about Pfizer and Moderna.

    Brianne Dressen was a participant on AZ RCT whose severe life-changing adverse effect was censored because it occurred after one dose. The published report says she "withdrew". She makes it clear she "was withdrawn". She says the FDA knows about her and thousands like her. She says she lost contact with people who were actively suicidal when fb censored their group. Doctors from the NIH have tried to help her and others (some of whom are physicians) who are vaccine-injured but they approached "journal after journal" and couldn't get their work published.


    @Taurisk You mentioned nastiness on both sides. I'm talking about nastiness of medical violence that became policy. I'm talking about people who didn't want or need these drugs subjected to extreme psychological abuse, many of whom have been permanently injured by them and had their injuries dismissed or minimised by people like you.

    What on earth has politics got to do with anything? I find your comment bizarre. Some of my sources may be considered right wing because of the extreme censorship and the propaganda that anyone who objects to the vicious forcing of an experimental drug onto people, including babies as young as six months, is a neo-nazi. If the Covid vaccines are left wing and "for the greater good", then why do you think poorer countries haven't had access to the "gold standard" mRNA drugs?

    I suggest you look at the facts. Is Emeritus Professor Robert Clancy right or wrong about mucosal immunology, that no one's vaccination status could have affected anyone else? Why don't you find an immunologist and ask them that? Even Pfizer explicitly states their brief was to produce a product designed to benefit only the individual. FDA said the same thing right from the get-go.

    You didn't offend me. I think mandate supporters (many of whom who have had multiple jabs and are running around catching and spreading Covid) and doctors (we know in cardiology and endocrinology who are worried about what they're seeing but keeping quiet to save their jobs) should be deeply ashamed of what went on in this country. I have no doubt whatsoever we will all pay the price for the deepest immorality of all. We already are.


 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.