Suppression of Free Speech on Covid

[Revoltingest]

Projecting much? You can't say why it's wrong.

Peer review involves criticism of research,
which is often revised as a result, eg, correcting
errors, conducting more research. Peers even
re-create experiments to verify the authors'
results, eg, cold fusion. This is all part of the
scientific method....or rather, "methods".
So you're wrong, & that's why.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Projecting much? You can't say why it's wrong.

Anyone who understands science already knows why it's wrong.

 

[Ebionite]

Peer review involves criticism of research,
which is often revised as a result, eg, correcting
errors, conducting more research. Peers even
re-create experiments to verify the authors'
results, eg, cold fusion. This is all part of the
scientific method....or rather, "methods".
So you're wrong, & that's why.

You're wrong because review is not part of the process of testabillity. The re-creation of experiments is science itself, not the review of science.

 

[Ebionite]

Hulscher et al have published the largest accumulation of autopsy result in deaths after COVID-19 vaccination. From a total of 325 cases, independent review found the COVID-19 vaccine was the cause of death in 73.9%. The vast majority had the cardiovascular system as the single fatal organ system injury to the body.

COVID-19 Vaccine is the Culprit in Majority Found Dead after Injection

Systemic Review of 325 Autopsies Finds Convincing Evidence--Lancet Censors Paper from PrePrint Server after Surge in Downloads--Story By Daily Skeptic--New Link to Manuscript Posted

petermcculloughmd.substack.com

 

[Revoltingest]

You're wrong because review is not part of the process of testabillity.

Peer review needn't have or be about testing.
A reviewer could spot a math, method, or other error.

The re-creation of experiments is science itself, not the review of science.

It is indeed. Pons & Fleischmann's cold fusion
experiments were found to be bogus because
reviewers re-created them, & found no cold fusion.

It seems you use a narrow & incorrect definition
of the scientific method/methods.

 

[Revoltingest]

Hulscher et al have published the largest accumulation of autopsy result in deaths after COVID-19 vaccination. From a total of 325 cases, independent review found the COVID-19 vaccine was the cause of death in 73.9%. The vast majority had the cardiovascular system as the single fatal organ system injury to the body.

COVID-19 Vaccine is the Culprit in Majority Found Dead after Injection

Systemic Review of 325 Autopsies Finds Convincing Evidence--Lancet Censors Paper from PrePrint Server after Surge in Downloads--Story By Daily Skeptic--New Link to Manuscript Posted

petermcculloughmd.substack.com

The man isn't an epidemiologist, which is the singular
field of study needed to analyze effects on a population.
Oh, he's a quack too...

Peter A. McCullough - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[SkepticThinker]

Hulscher et al have published the largest accumulation of autopsy result in deaths after COVID-19 vaccination. From a total of 325 cases, independent review found the COVID-19 vaccine was the cause of death in 73.9%. The vast majority had the cardiovascular system as the single fatal organ system injury to the body.

COVID-19 Vaccine is the Culprit in Majority Found Dead after Injection

Systemic Review of 325 Autopsies Finds Convincing Evidence--Lancet Censors Paper from PrePrint Server after Surge in Downloads--Story By Daily Skeptic--New Link to Manuscript Posted

petermcculloughmd.substack.com

So you don't like peer review. You believe it's not part of the scientific process (it is).
Instead, you trust any old unverified and unvetted claim you read on the internet, as long as it fits the narrative you like.
And you claim you're being the rational person here?
For real?

 

[Argentbear]

You're wrong because review is not part of the process of testabillity.

Neither is the writing of the paper but then testability is just a part of the scientific process

 

[Argentbear]

Hulscher et al have published the largest accumulation of autopsy result in deaths after COVID-19 vaccination. From a total of 325 cases, independent review found the COVID-19 vaccine was the cause of death in 73.9%. The vast majority had the cardiovascular system as the single fatal organ system injury to the body.

COVID-19 Vaccine is the Culprit in Majority Found Dead after Injection

Systemic Review of 325 Autopsies Finds Convincing Evidence--Lancet Censors Paper from PrePrint Server after Surge in Downloads--Story By Daily Skeptic--New Link to Manuscript Posted

petermcculloughmd.substack.com

yeah it failed it's peer review because "the study's conclusions are not supported by the study methodology."

What a shock

 

[Ebionite]

yeah it failed it's peer review because "the study's conclusions are not supported by the study methodology."

What a shock

And you believed that they were being honest about that because their assertion agrees with your preconceptions. The conclusions are supported by the facts relating to the long rubbery clots found by morticians after the quackcine was rolled out.

Neither is the writing of the paper but then testability is just a part of the scientific process

And your point is?

 

[Argentbear]

And you believed that they were being honest about that because their assertion agrees with your preconceptions. The conclusions are supported by the facts relating to the long rubbery clots found by morticians after the quackcine was rolled out.

Lets look at the details about why this was rejected.

The authors’ list included individuals well-known for having spread COVID-19 misinformation in the past, and for having produced fake research on the topic. Specifically Harvey Risch, Roger Hodkinson, William Makis. and Peter McCullough

Makis claimed without evidence that COVID-19 vaccines were responsible for the deaths of 80 Canadian doctors. People looking into this claim found that over 50 of the deaths were attributed to chronic illnesses the most common of which was cancer and an additional 12 deaths were the result of accidents.

six of the nine authors of the review are affiliated with The Wellness Company which sells untested medication designed to protect people from killer vaccines

The preprint states that the aim was to identify potential causal relationships between COVID-19 vaccination and death. To do this, the authors searched for autopsy studies on people who died after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. They identified 134 studies of which 44 met their undefined inclusion criterion. Then, three physicians reviewed all the cases to determine which deaths could be directly attributed to COVID-19 vaccination.

Based on the information available, they concluded that 73.9% (240) of the deaths, most of them occurring within one week following vaccination, “were attributable to fatal vaccine injury syndrome”. The term “vaccine injury syndrome” in the preprint. While “vaccine injury” is sometimes used to refer to side effects of vaccination, “vaccine injury syndrome” is a term that has been pushed specifically by anti-vaccine groups and fringe organizations such as Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance to refer to adverse events with no proven causal link to vaccination+


The authors excluded the majority of the studies identified in their search but with out identifying why the studies were excluded.

The fact that a person dies after COVID-19 vaccination isn’t sufficient in itself to make the claim that the vaccination caused the death. It would be like saying because the majority of people who died in a given time frame had accessed the internet in the preceding week that the internet must have caused their deaths.

And your point is?

That you don't seem to have a clue just what the scientific process entails.

 

[metis]

Trying and succeeding are different things. Reliance on peer-reviewed science did not help those who were injured or killed by the "safe and effective vaccine".

No medicine or vaccine works 100% perfectly, but the world has been using vaccines for over a century now, but according to you, they're stupid. Your "solution" would have killed multitudes of people, so how does that fit into the Gospels?

 

[metis]

Leaked RFK Jr. Call with Trump Talking About Vaccines After Assassination Attempt

"Footage of presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. talking on the phone with presidential frontrunner Donald Trump was leaked online this week.

Speaking about Kennedy’s beliefs on the corrupt U.S. medical industry, Trump said, “I agree with you, man. Something’s wrong with that whole system, and it’s the doctors you find.”

The 45th President pointed out there are “like 38 different vaccines” for babies nowadays and said some of them look like their meant “for a horse,” not a 10-pound baby.

“And then you see the baby starting to change radically. I’ve seen it too many times,” Trump said, adding, “And then you hear that it doesn’t have an impact, right?”"

If I were to take RFK Jr's word for this, please shoot me.

 

[Ebionite]

Your "solution" would have killed multitudes of people

Bollocks. Natural health does not kill people.

Covid shot causes heart failure:

"we describe the first case of biopsy-proven iDCM following heterologous mRNA-1273 immunization"

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ehf2.14924

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

You can't say why it's wrong.

You had written, "Peer review has no scientific value because it's not part of the scientific method."

There is no reason to give you an answer as to why you're wrong. Anybody who is as in the dark as you appear to be is there by design and wears an impenetrable faith-based confirmation bias from which he likely can't be rescued. I've never succeeded, and I no longer bother to try. You can't make a person see what he has a stake in not seeing.

If a young person asked a question about what peer review is and why it has value, it is probably sincere and deserves an answer. But not that.

Somebody recently (before the felony convictions) asked for evidence that Trump is a criminal. When I saw that this came from a 40-something, I gave him the same answer. If you cared, you'd know by now.

Or a mature biblical creationist asking for evidence for evolution. Why bother providing it? This is person who actively works against learning what they've decided by faith is untrue.

You're wrong because review is not part of the process of testabillity. The re-creation of experiments is science itself, not the review of science.

You don't know what peer review is, do you? Recreating experiments is reviewing the work of other scientists.

The scientific method is not limited to the initial experiment and paper. It begins before that, when funding is solicited, and experiment design is reviewed and approved or rejected. It continues (much to the chagrin of creationists trying to get junk science into them) with journal editorial boards deciding which papers get published and where. It includes considering papers with contradictory findings and resolving the differences. It includes the test of time. The theory of evolution is as much supported by the fact that it has not been overturned in over a century-and-a-half as it is by the physical findings supporting it.

 

[Ebionite]

Overview of evidence of harm from English cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra

https://files.catbox.moe/q3b00h.mp4

 

[Ebionite]

There is no reason to give you an answer as to why you're wrong.

The reason is that anyone reading this exchange can conclude that you don't answer because you can't show how I am wrong.

 

[Argentbear]

The reason is that anyone reading this exchange can conclude that you don't answer because you can't show how I am wrong.

From this and other posts it's obvious he does know and he can, like so many others here have, show exactly how you are wrong. He is saying it's not worth his time answering when you have already ignored everyone else

 

[metis]

Bollocks. Natural health does not kill people.

Covid shot causes heart failure:

"we describe the first case of biopsy-proven iDCM following heterologous mRNA-1273 immunization"

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ehf2.14924

Seriously delusional post by someone who blindly believes without actually doing the research from peer-reviewed studies. Your posts on this are based on your ignorance of the subject and also its long history.

 

[Kathryn]

You know what struck me as odd after I was vaccinated three different times and still got COVID a few weeks after the last "vaccination?" I was prescribed Paxlovid and I took the first dose of it, which had the same symptoms as COVID by the way, and was immediately struck with a terrible, metallic taste in my mouth, malaise, etc. Maybe it was just because I had COVID, who knows. But I stopped taking the Paxlovid and as soon as it was out of my system but while I still had a low-grade fever (my fever never got above around 100 F), all the other symptoms of COVID went away as quickly as they came. I had a fever for four days and was fever free for 24 hours before I returned to work. The only other symptom of COVID that I had was a mild cough that lasted a coupla weeks. But for the short amount of time I was on that Paxlovid I had every symptom of COVID imaginable, and I was told I would probably "rebound" too - ummmm, no thanks!