Asking the Questions
Tucker Carlson recently reported on his Fox News program that, according VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System, managed by the CDC and the FDA, from late December of 2020 and April 23 of this year 3362 deaths had been reported following taking the COVID-19 vaccine.
 |
| Tucker Carlson asks questions about the vaccine. screenshot from here |
Tucker was pretty clear to say that the VAERS reporting system does not necessarily mean these deaths were caused by the vaccine; they
could be deaths that coincidentally happened after the person received the
vaccine. The purpose for VAERS is to alert officials to possible
problems, so that when apparent problems arise, they can be investigated.
The problem is, you can’t even state the government data
without being taken down from YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, or any other platform
that abides by the censorship policy against their position.
I checked. Tucker Carlson’s video has been removed from
YouTube, with this notice:
Checked by PolitiFact • 3 days ago
Tucker Carlson's misleading claim about deaths after COVID-19
vaccine
Claim: “Between late December of 2020 and last month, a total
of 3,362 people apparently died after getting the COVID vaccine in the United
States … The...
Rating: False
It will send you to a rebuttal story here. You might also see a short video here.
Both of these claim Carlson’s story is false, because VAERS
reporting does not verify that those deaths were caused by the vaccine, only
that they were reported as happening after the person took the vaccine. Which
is what Carlson said. The difference, they seem to claim, is that, unless
the investigation has already taken place and proven causality, then you
shouldn’t question the efficacy or safety of the vaccine.
But when the numbers of “coincidental” deaths is as high as
it is, why hasn’t there been an investigation? Why hasn’t an independent safety
board been impaneled to do such an investigation so that, if the deaths are
100% not caused by the vaccine, we can be reassured? That is the question
Carlson asks. And that is the question being censored.
Incidentally, according to the VAERS website, they estimate
that only 1% of vaccine reaction incidents are reported. When you multiply the
3362 deaths by 100, you have 336,200. These are deaths that just happened to
occur shortly after a vaccine was given; nothing to see here. And, by the way,
as of yesterday the number was 3837.
Typically a treatment, such as a vaccine or a medication,
gets a “black box” warning with 5 deaths or serious reactions, and at 50 the
use is discontinued. So Carlson’s question seems appropriate with such a high
number of deaths. Note that it’s still a small percentage, because so many have
taken the vaccine. But can’t we even see the numbers to gauge whether the risk
of taking the vaccine is higher than the risk of getting the virus?
Approaches
to the Health Crisis
 |
| Dr. Peter McCullough screenshot from here |
Dr. McCullough explains that there are four pillars of dealing
with a public health event, such as a virus:
 |
| The Covid Patient Treatment Guide, p. 12 |
The first pillar, to prevent spread, is things like mask wearing, social distancing, and quarantining the ill. Early on I think these could include contact tracing. But by the time we had it in this country, we were probably already beyond the efficacy of that.
The second pillar is the neglected one, which Dr. McCullough
has been dealing with. Early on, when successful treatments were just being
found, he estimated about 50% of deaths were preventable. But with more time
and development of protocols for early treatment, that has risen to 85%. All
but maybe 15% of the 3.3 million deaths worldwide, or the 582,420 US deaths could have been prevented. And there
would have been hundreds of thousands, maybe millions fewer hospitalizations
and sufferers of long-term effects. This could have made the biggest
difference.
The third is for late-stage in-hospital treatment. If you
get to that point, you have a rather high likelihood of death, or at least a
long recovery, which could have been avoided if effective treatment had been
done early.
The fourth somehow became the agreed-upon approach. So this
is where energy and resources were placed, with the masking and shutting down
of the economy meant to keep people on hold until this solution appeared.
We talked here a few weeks ago about why the push for a
vaccine had to include a lack of treatment; you can’t get emergency use approval
for a vaccine that is for a virus that is treatable. So those who wanted to
push vaccines by all means had to lie to say there were no treatments.
Dr. McCullough mentioned that, additionally, on November 10,
2020, there was a Trusted News Initiative, which would not allow anything negative to be said about the vaccines, because
that might cause vaccine hesitancy. This included the BBC, Reuters, Facebook,
Google/YouTube, and Twitter. BBC Director Tim Davie says it this way: “The
project would not prevent ‘legitimate concerns’ about vaccines being aired, but
would attempt to stop ‘harmful disinformation myths.’” Except, note Tucker
Carlson’s story above, for example.
Maybe there should be some vaccine hesitancy.
Reasons for
Vaccine Hesitancy
On March 8 there was a report from the CDC stating that 1600
cases of death possibly caused by or affected by taking a COVID-19 vaccine were
reviewed by FDA doctors, who found that absolutely none of the deaths, zero,
were related to the vaccine. Oddly, the doctors are left anonymous, and,
according to Dr. McCullough, normally such an investigation would take months,
to go over medical records, death certificates, and relevant data surrounding
each case. So, we are to believe that a EUA (emergency use authorization) vaccine, which means the government
makes no guarantee of either safety or efficacy, has zero incidents of death
out of the 1600 suspected—following a propaganda initiative designed to prevent
any negative information from being published about the vaccines.
Maybe Tucker Carlson is right; maybe there ought to be an
independent safety board impaneled to look into the possibility that the
vaccine is doing harm—a board whose membership we can know, whose credentials
we can see and review, and whose membership actually treats COVID-19 patients.
Dr. McCullough points out that preliminary vaccine trials
specifically excluded the COVID-19-recovered, pregnant women, and women of
childbearing potential. That means there is no testing to show whether the
vaccines could harm such individuals. If the vaccines were to become
FDA-approved, they would have to notify that the vaccines have not been tested
for those groups, and the vaccine is therefore not recommended.
What we know now—or at least some doctors know—is that
COVID-19-recovered likely have full immunity lasting at least 17 years, based
on estimates from experience with earlier SARS. There is absolutely no reason
for someone who had the disease to receive the vaccine. There is only risk of
adverse reaction for them, no benefit. And they seem to be reacting at 2-3
times the rates of other people receiving the vaccines.
Concerning pregnant women, I remember early on (December?)
hearing it was not recommended for pregnant women. A woman had reported a
miscarriage following receiving the vaccine, and the response was, “She should
have known better. They said it wasn’t recommended for pregnant women.” Then
there’s a long silence on that. The next I heard was in a talk by Dr. Ryan Cole, in which he reported serious risk for
pregnant women. He knew a woman who, just the day before, had miscarried right
after getting the vaccine. He was warning about the vaccine for pregnant women,
but the CDC was no longer doing that. They had quietly slipped into encouraging
pregnant women to get vaccinated, despite the total lack of testing. Maybe warning pregnant women qualifies as causing vaccine hesitancy, and that is not allowed.
Last week a young woman I know lost her baby. Shortly,
though not immediately, after being vaccinated. She was one of the most
frightened-of-COVID people I know; she wore a mask in our home, and around
family. She was thrilled there was finally a vaccine. She was far enough along
that they had had a gender reveal ultrasound and were getting the baby’s room
ready in a new home. The pregnancy seemed healthy. Is it possible this
miscarriage was unrelated to the vaccine? Of course. But the coincidence of
timing means that it probably should be reported to VAERS. I suggested to her
sister that she do that. But I’m not close enough to say any more, or make her
feel like she should have known better than to get the vaccine—when the
government and media were lying to her.
If wading through the VAERS website is daunting for you, and
you just want some basic info about COVID-19 vaccines, Dr. McCullough suggests
OpenVAERS.com. You can click on the sections of information and get more
details, such as particular vaccines and the breakdown of incidents with them.
That site lists only 213 miscarriages following the vaccines. But if it did not
occur to my friend to report, there are likely others who didn’t report. Again,
VAERS suggests only 1% report. That would mean an estimated 21,300 miscarriages
following taking the vaccine. All merely coincidental? With a vaccine that has
been propagandized in ways no previous vaccine set has?
 |
| data from the OpenVAERS.com website on May 10, 2021 |
The Challenge of Getting Accurate Information
This past week Mikhaila Peterson (Jordan Peterson’s
daughter) did one of her podcasts where she has two guests with opposing views and
gets their answers to similar questions. It’s not easy to get guests to come on
her podcast under such circumstances. She got Dr. Joseph Mercola and Dr. Jeremy
Kamil. They did not see each other; she interviewed them separately and then
made the podcast with them one after the other.
Dr. Mercola speaks very fast, trying to get out more
information than can fit in the time frame. But he expressed a suspicion that
the virus—and the lockdown, and the refusal to allow treatment options, and the
push for vaccines—is an actual conspiracy with those forces who want what you
might call “The Great Reset,” which means a shutdown of the current economy and
the replacement with a socialized, controlled oligarchy worldwide.
I’ve heard stranger things. In fact, I think he’s as likely
on track as anything to explain what we’ve been experiencing—quarantining the
healthy and least susceptible, fearmongering, refusal to allow information
about treatments, pushing a vaccine that is not guaranteed either safe or
effective, pushing a vaccine on the recovered who have natural immunity, refusing
to allow negative vaccine information to be published, continuing controls over
people even after vaccination, and using pressure such as “vaccine passports”
to force people to comply.
Peterson was fairly well matched with Dr. Mercola, because
she willingly lives a rather drastically healthy lifestyle just to survive her
autoimmune illness, and he is all about careful eating and getting the right
nutrients to avoid medicine when possible. But she didn’t seem to know the
questions to ask Dr. Kamil—like what about recent studies that show that mask
wearing is actually ineffective. She was busy taking care of family last year
(much of it spent in Serbia) while I was here learning all I could about this
disease that was only marginally more dangerous than the flu but was keeping us
all trapped at home, and I wanted to know why. I had multiple questions to ask Dr.
Kamil, based on my reading and the contradictions I’ve come across.
So, I suggest you hear him as well. But then ask those
questions. And ponder why a doctor who doesn’t treat patients has such
different views from a doctor who does treat patients.
It has been especially difficult to get accurate information about COVID-19—because of the now-known propaganda campaign to favor vaccines, to empower governments to impose tyranny on citizens, and to quash information about treatments.
One meme tells you not to take advice from your Facebook
friend who still builds dollhouses and sells them online. I don’t actually do
that (although I admit it sounds interesting), but they mean people like me.
The thing is, I’m never putting myself out there as an expert; I’m suggesting
that I’m a regular thinking person on the hunt for truth. I say what I think
I’ve found, and here’s why I think this—which links to experts, most often
doctors actually treating patients with success. Sometimes I link to articles
and videos, and you can decide for yourself—assuming you can get to them before
they’re taken down. The people sharing this meme don’t explain why you should ignore
people like me but you should pay attention to people like them sharing memes.
There was another post reminding you not to listen to wacko
doctors and other “experts” online. They had a list. There was not a single one
I had referred to, and I’ve had a pretty long list. I’m guessing they were just
building another straw man.
I continue to keep daily records—based on what the county
public health site provides. They provide daily numbers, but I have to make the
comparisons to the day before and do the 7-day rolling averages. It has been a
couple of months, so here are the charts for where I live.
The daily average of COVID-19 deaths in Texas is hovering
around 41, in a population of nearly 29.5 million.
The daily average of COVID-19 deaths in Harris County is currently at 19. It has been at or under 20 since September. The county judge still claims we are in the red zone. For a while our proportion of deaths compared to the state of Texas was too low to be believable; I wondered (and never found out) where all those Texas deaths were happening. Now, without much change in the county death numbers, we’re at just under half of the state’s COVID deaths, which is a bit out of proportion in the other direction. We’re about 14% of the state’s population.
The only place I keep case data is in my zip code. I’m looking at new cases per day compared to change in active cases per day. New cases average 2 a day. Average active cases is at -3; that means more people are recovering per day than are getting the disease. Active cases are 0.15% of the population, or 1.5 cases per thousand people. Assuming the active cases are not wandering around the grocery store, your chances of running into someone who’s spreading the virus are pretty slim—unless you’re caring for someone who has the illness.
There have been a total of 24 deaths in my zip code, which is sad. I haven’t known any of them. I’ve wondered how many days between new deaths. So I did the math. It’s about 15 days, on average, over the time that I kept records (since last June, at which point we already had 2 deaths).
No comments:
Post a Comment