The AP’s fact check was about the claim that three doctors at one hospital system died after getting a covid vaccine shot.
“CLAIM: Three doctors at one hospital system in Canada recently died from COVID-19 vaccine shots.”
You are saying that is an error because 5 doctors died.
But the other two were not part of the “one hospital system”. Why is that an error on the APs part?
The three doctors all died from long-term cancers, according to news sources. Easily proven, easily verifiable. The AP story even highlights these facts.
Why are you using this as an example?
It’s stuff like this I keep seeing that makes me scratch my head about the claims of being information warriors here.
Excellent video.
That one single lady in the upper right wearing a mask the whole time really contrasts his calm and highly knowledgeable explanation of the science.
Reminds me of this chapter/scene from Hitchhiker’s: https://y.yarn.co/803678f5-fb78-4f5a-9c76-26ef186ef795_text.gif
So, your claim is that the vaccines had nothing to do with accelerating pre-existing cancers? How would you know that? Are you privy to autopsies and cell level histostaining and other investigations? Are you aware that there are hundreds of reports of rare cancers erupting and formerly latent cancers in people suddenly becoming fulminant post-vaccination? Are you aware that cancer is held in check by the immune system and that the immune system has been proven to be diminished by the shots? Dr. Lorne Segall who died after a “year-long battle” with lung cancer fits that dynamic very well assuming he got vaccinated in the spring of 2021. By the way, I personally know people who I love and cherish who this has happened to, or I strongly suspect has, and so if you or the hospital wants to claim it is absolutely not due to the shots or related in any way, again, you’ll have to bring something that looks like data. Not mere assertions.
My point stands. The hospital system said “the deaths weren’t vaccine-related” and they cannot simply claim that without offering any proof. That’s not how this works.
Steve Kirsch shared that video awhile back, roundabout the time there was major support for one of 2 countries at war. Stephen Petty is great (I saw another video (~45 min.) he did last year), but the Clorox bottle sitting next to him looked exactly like the flag of one of the aforementioned countries. Just me? Don’t mean to take away from his important message though. Anyone have a way to get the slides Petty mentions? Would love to have the evidence to pass on to the naysayers.
@mcconner1776 - if I remember rightly, I think Chris attempted to give AP the benefit of the doubt on the 3 vs 5 thing (maybe they happened after the reporter’s deadline), while at the same time pointing out the oddity of AP ignoring the other 2 deaths.
And when AP reports that a cancer diagnosed one year earlier was “long term” -that is stretching the truth a bit, no? When an ordinary person reads “long term” cancer, what do you suppose they are thinking? (My initial thought would be at least 3-5 years, probably even more. As would most people, I imagine, if you asked them.)
You may be 100% right in the end, but I hope we could agree that it’s not unreasonable to be a little bit skeptical of the AP reporting.
My sister shared this media bias chart with me (which I shared with my academic colleagues, who were all using The New York Times for student learning during lockdowns…sigh…).
If you scroll down to the chart, there’s a search box on the left where you can input a given media source (TV, newspaper, etc.); to the right of the chart, the dotted lines shows where the content lies (opinion, fact, etc.). Use it somewhat with a grain of salt and a lot more critical thinking based on what we’ve learned these past 2 years. My dad was surprised that his favorite magazine was center left and not as center as he thought, but biggies like “The Economist”, BBC, etc. also show up in the center and we know how reliable those are: https://adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/
LinkedIn changed dramatically after Microsoft bought it. It was an ok online Rolodex, where you could only connect with people under certain conditions. It was not about sharing articles etc. Then it gradually morphed into a pseudo-social media site. I hardly use it. I keep it in case I want to reach out to some old contacts whose info I haven’t bothered to write down. It’s pretty worthless at this point, and the semi-private networks we had are now fair game for others to peruse, which devalues the advantage of personally building a network.
Stop shouting. Give us a way of turning off the subtitles. They are so obnoxious. I am ready to stop watching and cancel my subscription. That’s how disturbing they are. Is there a way of turning them off? I am not seeing a way to do that.
“hundreds of reports of rare cancers erupting and formerly latent cancers in people suddenly becoming fulminant post-vaccination” No, I am not aware of this, nor would I interpret this as being caused by the vaccines without strong proof.
“the immune system has been proven to be diminished by the shots”
Really? Data please. And not Dr. Ryan Cole, please.
Gee, who to trust? An armchair scientist with anecdotal evidence? Or every cancer center I looked at for evidence of the vaccine causing cancer?
MD Anderson
Sloan Kettering
Yale Cancer Center
Penn Medicine’s Abramson Cancer Center
Mayo Clinic
Emory University Windsor Cancer Institute
Dana Farber Cancer Institute
Wayne State University Cancer Institute
National Institute of Health
Are they all - every one of them - wrong? Is their research somehow faulty or not up-to-date? Are they all - every one of them - lying about this?
Yes, all entities that represent the mainstream narrative of "safe and effective" are wrong. It's as simple as that.
You want to see one way that the immune system is diminished by the shots? How about this new finding from German scientists in early July.. for the triple vax'ed, your IgG antibodies start to turn off.. they start to convert to non-functional, non-inflammatory, IgG4 type as it relates to the spike protein. Not being able to direct T-cells... that's a diminishment no mainstream medical entity ever anticipated. It's a phenomenon that has never before been seen in the context of a vaccine.
https://unglossed.substack.com/p/boosting-tolerance-igg4
Of course, there's more.. but what's the point? You are either among the lost, or trolling. Either way, you are vastly outnumbered here and just the act of bringing mainstream narrative into this place shows how out of touch you are. Be well...
If any of these prestigious institutions had reported on vaccine injuries, spoken out against children being vaccinated or any adverse effects of the vaccine and there are many, they would be credible. But their silence and thus complicity make them guilty. Therefore we have zero trust in these institutions now. Oh and fyi, most of their cancer treatments are worthless and end in agonizing death. Only a few are truly work. Ask my mom….no wait you can’t because her chemo treatment robbed her of any last good days and basically killed her.
This morning, while trying to post an article about chronic illness, nothing to do with china/taiwan whatsoever. Seems fb algorithms for identifying posts is crummy. Also I wonder what can’t be said about the Taiwan issue on fb - whatever is being censored is likely to be close to truth on this issue too… https://peakprosperity.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Screenshot-2022-08-11-060446-1660197815.4724.png
“Data Please?”
See “Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs” Food and Chemical Toxicology. Volume 164, June 2022, 113008
And here is another:
Dr. Ute Kruger is a researcher and senior physician at Lunds University in Sweden. She’s the Chief of Pathology, a field that she’s worked in for the last 25 years, with a specialty in breast cancer diagnosis for the past 18 years. She’s studied thousands of autopsies and breast cancer samples. She’s extremely familiar with the industry and patient age, tumor size, and malignancy grade are all within her field of expertise and have had a natural rhythm throughout her career. That natural rhythm came to a halt in 2021 once the vaccine rollout began. Doctors for Covid Ethics posted an interview with her where she shared her concerns about unusual features that have been showing up in samples from the past year.
Age – The average ages of the samples she received dropped, with a rise in the number of samples from people in their 30’s-50’s.
Size – It used to be unusual for Dr. Kruger to find a tumor 3 cm in size. In this new environment, she’s regularly seeing tumors of 4 cm, 8 cm, 10 cm, and the occasional 12 cm. In a shocking anecdote, 2 weeks ago she found a 16 cm tumor that took up an entire breast.
Multiple Tumors – Dr. Kruger has begun to see more cases of multiple tumors growing in the same patient, sometimes even in both breasts. She had 3 cases within 3 weeks of patients who had tumors growing in multiple organs. One had tumors in his/her breast, pancreas and lungs within months of getting vaccinated.
Recurrence – There has been an uptick in patients who have been in remission from their cancer for many years, suddenly getting an aggressive recurrence of their cancer shortly after vaccination.
I watched that video. It really shows what is going on. A clueless intern is hired to try to write a hit piece against Kirsch. It is so obvious. Her questions show where she is headed. Even Kirsch knows what is going on as it unfolds. He is nice and respectful and answers all the questions. He suggests real avenues of inquiry, even though he knows it is going nowhere. After the “interview” Kirsch posts the video and the audio stream (done by mutual consent.) Then the fact checking organization asks him to take it down.
Why? They don’t allege it is inaccurate. They just want it taken down. The reason is obvious. It is embarrassing to the “fact checker” and to the “fact checking” organization.
Media is out of control in this country and it is damaging the social fabric.
