on COVID vaccines? Gee, whoda thunk?
Oh yeah, ME!
So who gives people their lives, health, jobs, and fertility back?
Publisher of Nature and Scientific American platforms COVID vaccine skeptics. CDC drafted alert about post-vaccination heart inflammation early in rollout but feared looking “alarmist,” emails suggest.
… The Springer Nature medical journal Cureus, sibling to Nature and Scientific American, published a peer-reviewed paper by high-profile mRNA vaccine critics last month, showing the growing mainstream openness to data and arguments once nitpicked if not ignored by publishers and suppressed by academia and Big Tech.
It’s really disheartening to see what has happened.
While early reports from the mRNA trials said the novel vaccines “could greatly reduce COVID-19 symptoms,” re-analysis of Pfizer’s trial data “identified statistically significant increases” in serious adverse events (SAEs) in the intervention group, which then became unmistakable after emergency use authorization, the Cureus paper says.
… “The risk-benefit imbalance substantiated by the evidence to date contraindicates further booster injections and suggests that, at a minimum, the mRNA injections should be removed from the childhood immunization program until proper safety and toxicological studies are conducted,” the paper also states.
Look, I’m already immuno-compromised because of the MS drug I take. There’s no way in Hell I would get the mRNA “vaccine.”
It is NOT a vaccine! DUH! The larger medical community should be ashamed of themselves!
