Make a Contribution to Remove NSFW Ads

Double Space Freddy & FDA now says Pfizer’s COVID-19 VACCINE Linked to Blood Clotting. [ADMIN UPDATE: DEBUNKED]

Mixd said:
I posted where this new study came from in another thread. This is a new study of 17 million people who took two doses.

This affected those over 65 mostly. So I know everyone on BGOL is under 64 so it don't affect "you", right...

=============

Surveillance of COVID-19 vaccine safety among elderly persons aged 65 years and older

Available online 1 December 2022

Abstract

Background
Monitoring safety outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination is critical for understanding vaccine safety especially when used in key populations such as elderly persons age 65 years and older who can benefit greatly from vaccination. We present new findings from a nationally representative early warning system that may expand the safety knowledge base to further public trust and inform decision making on vaccine safety by government agencies, healthcare providers, interested stakeholders, and the public.

Methods
We evaluated 14 outcomes of interest following COVID-19 vaccination using the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) data covering 30,712,101 elderly persons. The CMS data from December 11, 2020 through Jan 15, 2022 included 17,411,342 COVID-19 vaccinees who received a total of 34,639,937 doses. We conducted weekly sequential testing and generated rate ratios (RR) of observed outcome rates compared to historical (or expected) rates prior to COVID-19 vaccination.

Findings
Four outcomes met the threshold for a statistical signal following BNT162b2 vaccination including pulmonary embolism (PE; RR = 1.54), acute myocardial infarction (AMI; RR = 1.42), disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC; RR = 1.91), and immune thrombocytopenia (ITP; RR = 1.44). After further evaluation, only the RR for PE still met the statistical threshold for a signal; however, the RRs for AMI, DIC, and ITP no longer did. No statistical signals were identified following vaccination with either the mRNA-1273 or Ad26 COV2.S vaccines.

Interpretation
This early warning system is the first to identify temporal associations for PE, AMI, DIC, and ITP following BNT162b2 vaccination in the elderly. Because an early warning system does not prove that the vaccines cause these outcomes, more robust epidemiologic studies with adjustment for confounding, including age and nursing home residency, are underway to further evaluate these signals. FDA strongly believes the potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the potential risks of COVID-19 infection.

www.sciencedirect.com

Surveillance of COVID-19 vaccine safety among elderly persons aged 65 years and older

Monitoring safety outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination is critical for understanding vaccine safety especially when used in key populations such as…
www.sciencedirect.com www.sciencedirect.com
Click to expand...

you ought to be a Statistician...brah...you know your shit
 
killagram said:
did she have a good head on her shoulders... brah?
Click to expand...

Bomb! she swallowed. She took me out the game, bruh.
I'm officially a relationship man after years of playing the field.
New grounds for me. I'm getting older and need to get wiser...
 
APOPHIS said:
Bomb! she swallowed. She took me out the game, bruh.
I'm officially a relationship man after years of playing the field.
New grounds for me. I'm getting older and need to get wiser...
Click to expand...

you gone settle down wit a 20? how old are you... kinsfolk
 
BlackGoku said:
Agreed, don't post something and then when you're challenged on it say "oh well, im getting head anyway"..if you wanna troll, then say that, but i went and checked the youtube and all the facts because i wanna be sure, im about to go get my last booster of the holiday break...

BTW, the government is going to start mailing out free tests again..Link to full article here

Free COVID-19 Tests Are Available From the Government Again
1

Pete Grieve
Thu, December 15, 2022 at 12:46 PM EST·2 min read


Money; Shutterstock
Americans can once again order free COVID-19 tests from the federal government as a new round of distribution opens.
After stopping the initiative earlier this year, the Biden administration is relaunching the program “to stay ahead of an increase in COVID-19 cases this winter,” according to a Thursday announcement from the White House. Each household will again be able to order four free tests, which will be shipped by the U.S. Postal Service starting later this month.
From January to September, people were able to request rapid at-home COVID-19 tests from the COVID.gov website. More than 600 million free tests were delivered by mail through the government program. Distribution was ultimately paused because Congress didn’t approve funding to replenish the stockpile of tests, the White House said.
But on Thursday, the Biden administration said it’s using some remaining funds to reopen the program for a “limited round” of ordering.
However, it’s not yet clear how many total tests will be available in this round — so you might want to go ahead and order them now.
How to order free COVID-19 tests
To order the antigen tests, all you have to do is visit the government website and enter your name and residential address. You can also include your email if you’d like to get shipping updates.
This is the fourth round of free COVID-19 test distribution. The first two rounds of shipments included four tests each, and eight more tests were available for ordering in the third round, which began in May.
In a statement, the White House said “COVID-19 is not the disruptive force it once was” but reiterated that testing remains important, especially with families preparing to gather for the holidays. Officials encourage using the home tests if you feel symptoms that could be COVID-19, when you’re visiting vulnerable people indoors, and before and after holiday travel.
Click to expand...

The article from Epoch summarized a 8 hour long video the FDA put out.
I wish more mainstream media outlets would question the vaccine narrative as much as some of the smaller "right leaning" outlets but sadly that will never happen until irrefutable truth comes out and there are mass uprisings.

@Camille sorry to hear about your condition but as you can see, I posted a video link as well.

www.sciencedirect.com

Surveillance of COVID-19 vaccine safety among elderly persons aged 65 years and older

Monitoring safety outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination is critical for understanding vaccine safety especially when used in key populations such as…
www.sciencedirect.com www.sciencedirect.com
Right now the evidence is for 65 and over but how long before they make the connection for those who are 50 an under? We must keep an open mind about these things.
 
Last edited:
Me watching you dudes swear a random youtube video is all the proof you need. The best thing about Covid is that it helps show you who the dumb people are in your circles.

choujeki-eating-popcorn.gif
 
Mixd said:
I posted where this new study came from in another thread. This is a new study of 17 million people who took two doses.

This affected those over 65 mostly. So I know everyone on BGOL is under 64 so it don't affect "you", right...

=============

Surveillance of COVID-19 vaccine safety among elderly persons aged 65 years and older

Available online 1 December 2022

Abstract

Background
Monitoring safety outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination is critical for understanding vaccine safety especially when used in key populations such as elderly persons age 65 years and older who can benefit greatly from vaccination. We present new findings from a nationally representative early warning system that may expand the safety knowledge base to further public trust and inform decision making on vaccine safety by government agencies, healthcare providers, interested stakeholders, and the public.

Methods
We evaluated 14 outcomes of interest following COVID-19 vaccination using the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) data covering 30,712,101 elderly persons. The CMS data from December 11, 2020 through Jan 15, 2022 included 17,411,342 COVID-19 vaccinees who received a total of 34,639,937 doses. We conducted weekly sequential testing and generated rate ratios (RR) of observed outcome rates compared to historical (or expected) rates prior to COVID-19 vaccination.

Findings
Four outcomes met the threshold for a statistical signal following BNT162b2 vaccination including pulmonary embolism (PE; RR = 1.54), acute myocardial infarction (AMI; RR = 1.42), disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC; RR = 1.91), and immune thrombocytopenia (ITP; RR = 1.44). After further evaluation, only the RR for PE still met the statistical threshold for a signal; however, the RRs for AMI, DIC, and ITP no longer did. No statistical signals were identified following vaccination with either the mRNA-1273 or Ad26 COV2.S vaccines.

Interpretation
This early warning system is the first to identify temporal associations for PE, AMI, DIC, and ITP following BNT162b2 vaccination in the elderly. Because an early warning system does not prove that the vaccines cause these outcomes, more robust epidemiologic studies with adjustment for confounding, including age and nursing home residency, are underway to further evaluate these signals. FDA strongly believes the potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the potential risks of COVID-19 infection.

www.sciencedirect.com

Surveillance of COVID-19 vaccine safety among elderly persons aged 65 years and older

Monitoring safety outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination is critical for understanding vaccine safety especially when used in key populations such as…
www.sciencedirect.com www.sciencedirect.com
Click to expand...

Reading through this study, and looking at the discussion, it appears that the results are inconlcusive...


4. Discussion
Our early warning safety system is the first to identify-four new statistical signals for modestly elevated risks (RR less than 2) of four serious outcomes of AMI, PE, DIC, and ITP following BNT162b2 vaccination. This FDA and CMS COVID-19 vaccine safety study is one of the largest studies of elderly persons aged 65 years and above including approximately 34 million doses administered to more than 17 million Medicare insured persons. Our surveillance monitoring did not detect statistical signals for the mRNA-1273and Ad26 COV2.S vaccines for any of the 14 monitored outcomes.

The statistical signals of four serious outcomes are not necessarily causal and may be due to factors potentially unrelated to vaccination. Additional analyses indicated that the potential association was less than twice the historical rates and may be associated with factors not accounted for in the near real-time surveillance methods. For example, the elderly Medicare population that received the BNT162b2 vaccine differed from other elderly COVID-19 vaccinated populations, including a preponderance of nursing home residents and populations with a higher comorbidity burden. These demographic and medical differences were not fully accounted for, since expected rates were only standardized to a subset of characteristics – age, sex, race, and nursing home residency status. Further, the AMI, DIC, and ITP signals were not robust when additional baseline rates were evaluated, while the PE signal might be explained by differences in rates between the pre-COVID-19 and peri-COVID-19 periods. In addition, the clinical assessment of patterns of reimbursement codes indicated that a substantial fraction had pre-existing outcome-specific comorbidities and risk factors, and that some outcomes may be due to follow-up care to an existing condition preceding the vaccination.

Our study has several strengths. This is the largest study of a population of more than 25 million elderly persons who are vulnerable to COVID-19 infections and complications- including residents of long-term care facilities. By using the large Medicare nationwide database with longitudinal linkage of vaccination, health services, and demographic information for millions of elderly persons, we can detect even small increases in the relative risk of rare outcomes for multiple vaccines that may not be captured in pre-authorization clinical trials. In addition, this near real-time surveillance benefits from the experience and knowledge obtained during more than a dozen years of successful collaboration between FDA and CMS conducting vaccine safety analyses using the Medicare database [13], including near real-time surveillance analyses for Guillain-Barré syndrome after influenza vaccination [14], [15], [16]. Furthermore, the weekly data updates and analyses allow for signal detection across 14 outcomes using near-real time monitoring. This further expands our knowledge of COVID-19 vaccine safety for informing timely regulatory action, if warranted as well as decision-making by healthcare providers, patients and the general public.

We acknowledge our analysis has limitations. The near real-time analysis did not adjust for underlying risk factors such as comorbidities among recipients in the early vaccination campaign leading to falsely positive or negative signals. Furthermore, the early warning system may falsely identify a signal (false positive) or signals because of the high number of statistical tests performed or possible misspecification of parameters. Conversely, true safety signals (false negatives) may be missed due to mispecified parameters in the analyses. Diagnosis billing codes in claims data may underestimate or overestimate certain clinical conditions because of reimbursement priorities. We also note that results of this near real-time surveillance in elderly persons may not be generalizable to those younger than 65 years and adults who are uninsured or received only commercial health insurance. To address several of these limitations we are conducting further epidemiological studies along with medical record review to adjudicate outcomes identified by claims-based definitions.
 
At the end of the year, lets take a look at the heart disease/ stroke deaths and that should provide some insight on what is going on after we verify that deaths are being counted in the same manner as years past

The line that the vaccine is killing twice as many as it saves is clearly nonsense...one couldnt hide that many deaths
 
BlackGoku said:
Reading through this study, and looking at the discussion, it appears that the results are inconlcusive...


4. Discussion
Our early warning safety system is the first to identify-four new statistical signals for modestly elevated risks (RR less than 2) of four serious outcomes of AMI, PE, DIC, and ITP following BNT162b2 vaccination. This FDA and CMS COVID-19 vaccine safety study is one of the largest studies of elderly persons aged 65 years and above including approximately 34 million doses administered to more than 17 million Medicare insured persons. Our surveillance monitoring did not detect statistical signals for the mRNA-1273and Ad26 COV2.S vaccines for any of the 14 monitored outcomes.

The statistical signals of four serious outcomes are not necessarily causal and may be due to factors potentially unrelated to vaccination. Additional analyses indicated that the potential association was less than twice the historical rates and may be associated with factors not accounted for in the near real-time surveillance methods. For example, the elderly Medicare population that received the BNT162b2 vaccine differed from other elderly COVID-19 vaccinated populations, including a preponderance of nursing home residents and populations with a higher comorbidity burden. These demographic and medical differences were not fully accounted for, since expected rates were only standardized to a subset of characteristics – age, sex, race, and nursing home residency status. Further, the AMI, DIC, and ITP signals were not robust when additional baseline rates were evaluated, while the PE signal might be explained by differences in rates between the pre-COVID-19 and peri-COVID-19 periods. In addition, the clinical assessment of patterns of reimbursement codes indicated that a substantial fraction had pre-existing outcome-specific comorbidities and risk factors, and that some outcomes may be due to follow-up care to an existing condition preceding the vaccination.

Our study has several strengths. This is the largest study of a population of more than 25 million elderly persons who are vulnerable to COVID-19 infections and complications- including residents of long-term care facilities. By using the large Medicare nationwide database with longitudinal linkage of vaccination, health services, and demographic information for millions of elderly persons, we can detect even small increases in the relative risk of rare outcomes for multiple vaccines that may not be captured in pre-authorization clinical trials. In addition, this near real-time surveillance benefits from the experience and knowledge obtained during more than a dozen years of successful collaboration between FDA and CMS conducting vaccine safety analyses using the Medicare database [13], including near real-time surveillance analyses for Guillain-Barré syndrome after influenza vaccination [14], [15], [16]. Furthermore, the weekly data updates and analyses allow for signal detection across 14 outcomes using near-real time monitoring. This further expands our knowledge of COVID-19 vaccine safety for informing timely regulatory action, if warranted as well as decision-making by healthcare providers, patients and the general public.

We acknowledge our analysis has limitations. The near real-time analysis did not adjust for underlying risk factors such as comorbidities among recipients in the early vaccination campaign leading to falsely positive or negative signals. Furthermore, the early warning system may falsely identify a signal (false positive) or signals because of the high number of statistical tests performed or possible misspecification of parameters. Conversely, true safety signals (false negatives) may be missed due to mispecified parameters in the analyses. Diagnosis billing codes in claims data may underestimate or overestimate certain clinical conditions because of reimbursement priorities. We also note that results of this near real-time surveillance in elderly persons may not be generalizable to those younger than 65 years and adults who are uninsured or received only commercial health insurance. To address several of these limitations we are conducting further epidemiological studies along with medical record review to adjudicate outcomes identified by claims-based definitions.
Click to expand...
Correct. The FDA is making beaucoup dollars from big pharma. So of course they are treading lightly. Plus the fact that many FDA employees have been hired and employed by Pfizer so they're not going to admit anything.

I'm exhausted trying to argue or go on about the subject with many. I don't post proofs here because if one wanted to seek, they would find the answers they look for.

Anyone can easily go on Twitter right now.

Search #Pfizer. It's trending right now this moment.
Search 'FDA Clotting'
Look at all the comments of people who are real stories of being in their 20's with strokes, heart attacks, chest pains since second dose. Tons of posts now. This ain't 2021.

What the FDA said was this, treading lightly:
"FDA researchers, crunching data from a database of elderly persons in the United States, found that pulmonary embolism—blood clotting in the lungs—met the initial threshold for a statistical signal and continued meeting the criteria after a more in-depth evaluation."



So each have to draw their own conclusions.
Walmart is giving out $25 gift cards to come and get the shots again this Xmas. I think that's crazy.
 
Mixd said:
Correct. The FDA is making beaucoup dollars from big pharma. So of course they are treading lightly. Plus the fact that many FDA employees have been hired and employed by Pfizer so they're not going to admit anything.

I'm exhausted trying to argue or go on about the subject with many. I don't post proofs here because if one wanted to seek, they would find the answers they look for.

Anyone can easily go on Twitter right now.

Search #Pfizer. It's trending right now this moment.
Search 'FDA Clotting'
Look at all the comments of people who are real stories of being in their 20's with strokes, heart attacks, chest pains since second dose. Tons of posts now. This ain't 2021.

What the FDA said was this, treading lightly:
"FDA researchers, crunching data from a database of elderly persons in the United States, found that pulmonary embolism—blood clotting in the lungs—met the initial threshold for a statistical signal and continued meeting the criteria after a more in-depth evaluation."



So each have to draw their own conclusions.
Walmart is giving out $25 gift cards to come and get the shots again this Xmas. I think that's crazy.
Click to expand...

Bro you saying the SPECIFIC thing HE posted to start this thread is accurate?
 
playahaitian said:
Bro you saying the SPECIFIC thing HE posted to start this thread is accurate?
Click to expand...
I said FDA found 'some findings to be of initial concern'.

They are dancing around because they will not call out Pfizer. This is about money.

When they initially found clots in J&J, they removed their version (basic corporate takedown)

www.cnet.com

COVID-19 vaccine blood clots: Should you be concerned?

The Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine was paused over concerns of blood clots. Here's the real amount of risk.
www.cnet.com www.cnet.com

But as I said, go on Twitter. Search "Pfizer" or search "FDA clotting"

Just read and scroll people's posts.

Draw your own conclusions
 
Mixd said:
I said FDA found 'some findings to be of initial concern'.

They are dancing around because they will not call out Pfizer. This is about money.

When they initially found clots in J&J, they removed their version (basic corporate takedown)

www.cnet.com

COVID-19 vaccine blood clots: Should you be concerned?

The Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine was paused over concerns of blood clots. Here's the real amount of risk.
www.cnet.com www.cnet.com

But as I said, go on Twitter. Search "Pfizer" or search "FDA clotting"

Just read and scroll people's posts.

Draw your own conclusions
Click to expand...

Bro you and me my family

you know I trust you and I aint say what you said is wrong

all I'm saying is HOW and WHAT he posted..

you think it was well done, coming from a good place and accurate?
 
playahaitian said:
Bro you and me my family

you know I trust you and I aint say what you said is wrong

all I'm saying is HOW and WHAT he posted..

you think it was well done, coming from a good place and accurate?
Click to expand...
Yeah the evidence is overwhelming at this point.

Posts in the thread showed stuff debunking things from over a year ago. They were from 2021 in the summer and fall.

Here we are entering 2023
Look on Twitter and read the stories.
Don't take my word for it.
 
On a sidenote: Yall stay away from eating chocolate...may be some lead in your favorite brands..

Link here

Dangerous heavy metals like lead found in popular dark chocolate brands, including Hershey's and Trader Joe's, report says
Gabby Landsverk
Fri, December 16, 2022 at 3:21 PM EST
A person with eyes closed eating a bar of chocolate
Dark chocolate has long been praised for its health benefits — however, recent testing found contaminants like lead in popular brands. Experts say moderation and awareness are key to safely enjoying chocolate.Ute Grabowsky / Getty Images
Dark chocolate is widely considered healthy, but testing found contaminants in popular brands.

Consumer Reports identified both cadmium and lead in chocolate brands like Trader Joe's and Hu.

Exposure is linked to serious health issues over time. Experts say awareness and moderation are key.

Dangerous heavy metals, including lead, may be lurking in your favorite dark chocolate brands, according to new test results released by Consumer Reports.

The consumer advocacy nonprofit tested 28 different dark chocolate bars from popular brands. They found that all but five of them contained high enough levels of contaminants that eating an ounce per day could put an adult over the levels typically considered safe.

Chocolate from brands including Tony's, Lindt, Hershey's, and Hu were found to contain comparatively high levels of lead.

Exposure to lead is linked to cognitive impairment, particularly in children, since it can lead to developmental issues and lower IQ. It can also cause reproductive problems in adults, as well as high blood pressure and neurological issues, according to the Mayo Clinic.

High levels of cadmium were detected in Lindt, Dove, and Beyond Good products, among others. The mineral is considered cancer-causing and exposure over time is linked to kidney disease and fragile bones, according to the CDC.

One Trader Joe's bar was found to contain high levels of both lead and cadmium.

Dark chocolate tends to be higher in heavy metals than milk chocolate because it contains more cacao, the bean used to make chocolate, which can be contaminated either from the soil its grown in, or after the beans are picked, researchers told Consumer Reports.

The levels found in the testing don't violate any laws, according to Consumer Reports, since there are no federal limits for lead and cadmium in most foods.

But a major risk of heavy metals is that they can build up in the body over time, causing health issues as repeated tiny doses add up, according to the Cleveland Clinic.

As a result, it's worth being aware of the risk, and there may be ways to reduce your exposure by opting for products with lower levels, like some of the chocolate bars tested, according to the food safety researchers at Consumer Reports.

"That shows it's possible for companies to make products with lower amounts of heavy metals—and for consumers to find safer products that they enjoy," said Tunde Akinleye, the Consumer Reports food safety researcher who led the testing project.

Several of the mentioned brands contacted for comment by Insider referred to a statement by the the National Confectioners Association, which cites a settlement in California related to contamination concerns.

"The products cited in this study are in compliance with strict quality and safety requirements, and the levels provided to us by Consumer Reports testing are well under the limits established by our settlement," the statement reads in part. "Food safety and product quality remain our highest priorities and we remain dedicated to being transparent and socially responsible."

Dark chocolate is often considered a healthier choice, but steer clear of contaminants
Despite concern about contamination, there's good reason to enjoy dark chocolate occasionally.

Evidence suggests dark chocolate is hearty-healthy, helping to lower cholesterol and blood pressure thanks to beneficial plant-based compounds called flavonoids.

In contrast, milk chocolate has fewer flavonoids, and more additives such as sugar. The tradeoff, however, is that the nutrient-rich cacao can be the source of the contaminants found by Consumer Reports.

Some researchers are looking to infuse the benefits of dark chocolate into sweeter milk chocolate varieties. For now, your best bet may be moderation, according to the Consumer Reports researcher.

One serving of dark chocolate is about an ounce, or around 30 grams.

"Having a serving a few days a week, especially with a product that has lower levels, means you can eat dark chocolate without worrying unduly," Akinleye said.

Read the original article on Insider
 
APOPHIS said:
You know what, I'm not gonna back and forth with y'all. I'm in a chill mode. Just got head from a 25 year old.

There will come a time when this COVID cover up is revealed.
Untilthen, I hope none of ya'll is affected negatively by this fuckery.

Back to ripe titties I go.
Click to expand...
You dumb ass niggas wanna be right about that shit soooo bad lol

Gtfohwtbs
 
Mixd said:
if one wanted to seek, they would find the answers they look for.

Anyone can easily go on Twitter right now.

Search #Pfizer. It's trending right now this moment.
Search 'FDA Clotting'
Look at all the comments of people who are real stories of being in their 20's with strokes, heart attacks, chest pains since second dose. Tons of posts now. This ain't 2021.
Click to expand...

The fact that people consider Twitter (and youtube) as actual scientific research is the problem.

I mean Twitter says there is no such thing as police targeting Black people and no such thing as systemic racism so I guess they’re right about that as well.

I mean there comments from unverified “people” so clearly that matter more than what the scientists and doctors say.[/QUOTE]
 
I have a family history of pulmonary embolism (clots that reach the lungs)....was in the hospital with multiple embolism in 2008.


...I also got the two initial Pfizer shots + the first two boosters(getting the third eventually). So far so good, but if I die soon, I'll let y'all know :lol:

Also, my primary doctor, who called me and told me to get my ass to the hospital when he saw my CT scan result in 2008, is a pulmonary specialist, and has expressed no concern over me getting the shots.



.
 
Last edited:
i just came in here to laugh ... i did.. carry on .... ha!! to think i used to go back n forth with these cats...:roflmao2: glad more folks r starting to peep how to read articles & find sources & origin to stories
 
Big Tex said:
The fact that people consider Twitter (and youtube) as actual scientific research is the problem.

I mean Twitter says there is no such thing as police targeting Black people and no such thing as systemic racism so I guess they’re right about that as well.

I mean there comments from unverified “people” so clearly that matter more than what the scientists and doctors say.
Click to expand...

Whatever floats your boat.
 
Mixd said:
I said FDA found 'some findings to be of initial concern'.

They are dancing around because they will not call out Pfizer. This is about money.

When they initially found clots in J&J, they removed their version (basic corporate takedown)

www.cnet.com

COVID-19 vaccine blood clots: Should you be concerned?

The Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine was paused over concerns of blood clots. Here's the real amount of risk.
www.cnet.com www.cnet.com

But as I said, go on Twitter. Search "Pfizer" or search "FDA clotting"

Just read and scroll people's posts.

Draw your own conclusions
Click to expand...

Twitter trends and searches are no longer reliable for anything, not just the covid stuff. Certain topics are full of trolls, bots and intentional misinformation. You have to go to accounts already established as a trusted source or medical authority pre-Elon.
 
Camille said:
Twitter trends and searches are no longer reliable for anything, not just the covid stuff. Certain topics are full of trolls, bots and intentional misinformation. You have to go to accounts already established as a trusted source or medical authority pre-Elon.
Click to expand...
So you believe that since Elon took over that people randomly posting there are trolls and bots?

Then what were they before? Lol

You bother to look? No, right?

Cool story...

Again. Whatever floats your boat. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything
 
Mixd said:
So you believe that since Elon took over that people randomly posting there are trolls and bots?

Then what were they before? Lol

You bother to look? No, right?

Cool story...

Again. Whatever floats your boat. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything
Click to expand...

I know what I'm seeing when I do searches. Often tweets from different accounts with the exact same sentences, catch phrases, spaces and/or typos. When I look at the individual timelines they are often posting the same thing repeatedly or have timelines full of misinformation or QAnon stuff.

Twitter was banning certain accounts or tagging the blatant misinformation, but that is rarely happening anymore.

I'm all for alternative medicines and stuff. Im a big advocate for herbs, but certain facts on how viruses work etc is still needed as a basis. We have mortality stats available. If people with the vaccine were dying as a result of it, morgue would be overflowing worse than when covid hit and ambulances would still be backed up. If you want to get decent info check individual accounts. Start with these. See who they quote or cite. Real doctors and not folks with degrees in Twitter medicine.






 
Camille said:
I know what I'm seeing when I do searches. Often tweets from different accounts with the exact same sentences, catch phrases, spaces and/or typos. When I look at the individual timelines they are often posting the same thing repeatedly or have timelines full of misinformation or QAnon stuff.

Twitter was banning certain accounts or tagging the blatant misinformation, but that is rarely happening anymore.

I'm all for alternative medicines and stuff. Im a big advocate for herbs, but certain facts on how viruses work etc is still needed as a basis. We have mortality stats available. If people with the vaccine were dying as a result of it, morgue would be overflowing worse than when covid hit and ambulances would still be backed up. If you want to get decent info check individual accounts. Start with these. See who they quote or cite. Real doctors and not folks with degrees in Twitter medicine.






Click to expand...
Wasn't saying people were giving advice or anything of the sort.

All I saw tonite was Pfizer was trending. When you look at posts of why, you see many people complaining or posting their stories.

When you search FDA Clotting, you see many posts of regular people.

If you still think thousands of posts of people are trolls or bots making those posts, then ok.

I'm not looking for advice or wasn't taking medical advice from Twitter. Never said look there for that.

Just saw the posts of people's comments of what happened to them.

Simply why I said look.
 
Mixd said:
Wasn't saying people were giving advice or anything of the sort.

All I saw tonite was Pfizer was trending. When you look at posts of why, you see many people complaining or posting their stories.

When you search FDA Clotting, you see many posts of regular people.

If you still think thousands of posts of people are trolls or bots making those posts, then ok.

I'm not looking for advice or wasn't taking medical advice from Twitter. Never said look there for that.

Just saw the posts of people's comments of what happened to them.

Simply why I said look.
Click to expand...

I did do a search. Everything is either referring back to Epoch Times, saying I told you so and referring back to Epoch Times, or just quoting or restating the headline (lie) that fda says the Vax leads to clotting. It's all referring to the fda meeting where the clotting comment was made, but it the headlines cite the fda as the source of the clotting quote when it was that wack job conspiracy Kirsch guy who was just a public commenter at a public meeting.

That's like the city having a open forum meeting, me showing up and saying the city of Columbus is putting alien eggs in the drinking water and research shows that there are 600 eggs per 200 ml of water to impregnate our women and replace humans, and the next day a news paper stating the city admitted to inserting alien eggs in the drinking water. It's just a crazy comment from a public attendee. Yes the comment was made, but its being attributed to the wrong entity simply because it was their event where it was said.


What I don't see in this search is personal stories of people saying THEY had blood clots as a result of the vaccine. Just that one doctor being cited as proof it's happening because he says online he saw an increase in his practice. No other doctors are saying the same thing?
 
What they aren't telling you is that if you had covid-19 the risk of getting blood clot issues is even higher. So unless you have a safer way of avoid the virus I highly recommend you take the vaccine rather than dealing with all the unknown variables associated with getting the virus without any protection.

"Some people infected with SARS-CoV-2 develop abnormal blood clotting. “In some people with COVID-19, we're seeing a massive inflammatory response, the cytokine storm that raises clotting factors in the blood,” says Galiatsatos, who treats patients with COVID-19."
 
Camille said:
I did do a search. Everything is either referring back to Epoch Times, saying I told you so and referring back to Epoch Times, or just quoting or restating the headline (lie) that fda says the Vax leads to clotting. It's all referring to the fda meeting where the clotting comment was made, but it the headlines cite the fda as the source of the clotting quote when it was that wack job conspiracy Kirsch guy who was just a public commenter at a public meeting.

That's like the city having a open forum meeting, me showing up and saying the city of Columbus is putting alien eggs in the drinking water and research shows that there are 600 eggs per 200 ml of water to impregnate our women and replace humans, and the next day a news paper stating the city admitted to inserting alien eggs in the drinking water. It's just a crazy comment from a public attendee. Yes the comment was made, but its being attributed to the wrong entity simply because it was their event where it was said.

Click to expand...
Then look at posts I suppose that have many replies. Like the first post of that Chuck guy. I saw many replies on that. I'm just looking at comments many were making is what I was pointing out. Look at the replies


I just saw this which I thought was crazy and should raise red flags

 
Mixd said:
Then look at posts I suppose that have many replies. Like the first post of that Chuck guy. I saw many replies on that. I'm just looking at comments many were making is what I was pointing out. Look at the replies


I just saw this which I thought was crazy and should raise red flags

Click to expand...


Did you watch the video? This is trying to cast doubt on the Pfizer study because she has worked for and advised them in the past. She clearly states her role and what she was paid for. It doesn't state what in the study they believe is false. Google her. She's an expert. She's not going to risk her reputation to lie for them.
 
Mixd said:
Then look at posts I suppose that have many replies. Like the first post of that Chuck guy. I saw many replies on that. I'm just looking at comments many were making is what I was pointing out. Look at the replies


I just saw this which I thought was crazy and should raise red flags

Click to expand...

Dawg. I'm trying so hard to keep this civil lol

DID/DO YOU BOTHER TO LOOK AT THE TIMELINESS OF THE PEOPLE YOU ARE CITING?

Their post histories? Their retweets?

Did you think to look at any of that shit?
 

Make a Contribution to Remove NSFW Ads
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mask
UK pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca, in court had to admit that its Covid-19 Covishield, can lead to rare blood clot side effects
2
Replies
36
Views
624
easy_b
easy_b
ORIGINAL NATION
WHY DO VACCINATED PEOPLE REPRESENT MOST COVID-19 DEATHS RIGHT NOW
Replies
34
Views
1K
Mrfreddygoodbud
M
MASTERBAKER
President Joe Biden tests positive for COVID-19
Replies
1
Views
136
MASTERBAKER
MASTERBAKER
E
GAME OVER : Medicare Data proves Covid Vaccine increases your chance of Dying
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
xfactor
X
mangobob79
Founder Of Anti-Vaccine Christian TV Network Dies After COVID-19 Fight
2 3
Replies
74
Views
3K
jack walsh13
jack walsh13
Back
Top