• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Suppression of Free Speech on Covid

Pogo

Well-Known Member
You started the Black Box thingy.
Yes that is the reason for black box warnings, there are times when there are unusual responses, I take several and have refused several because I was not willing to take the risk.
@Kathryn's objections are only those of one who assumes there is absolute surety in science. Nuff said.
 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
You fixated on it. I said it in passing. You kept on harping on it, like it was some sort of conspiracy theory or something. When you were proven wrong, you started asking me "What does this have to do with the topic?" instead of just saying that you were wrong. Like an adult does. Like I do when I am wrong.

And you are STILL going on and on about it.
You have yet to explain what is relevant about black box warnings which are specifically that there are known instances of major negative reactions in spite of the general utility of a given procedure.
Anecdotes are nice, but they are not evidence that there is a problem with the system.
If you were not informed, that is not the failure of the black box warning system, but of the person who prescribed the treatment to you.
You seem to be arguing in this post and many that anecdotal evidence is more than just that. Feel free to rewrite statistical analysis, but you will not do it here.
 

Argentbear

Well-Known Member
The redefintion of words doesn't support the agenda of those who redefined them (contra proferentem). It's consistent with the wider context of medical malfeasance.


The group responsible for pandemic policy within the Task Force was not HHS or NIAID, where Fauci worked, or any other public health agency. It was the National Security Council (NSC).
and the author of this, Debbie Lerman is an artist in Philadelphia with a BA in English Lit. With credentials like that how could anyone doubt her pronouncements?

Anyone who would have taken 20 seconds to actually look at this woman's claims would see that it is the job of the national security council to coordinate the response to large scale emergencies like a pandemic.
Lerman is using herself as evidence for her own claims. This pretty much spells either fraud or idiot.
 

Ebionite

Well-Known Member
One of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s jobs is to carefully evaluate the scientific data on a drug to be sure that it is both safe and effective for a particular use.
Isaac Belfer, who defended the FDA in a legal case brought by three doctors, including Texas’ Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, was secretly recorded stating that the agency overstepped its authority by recommending what drugs should and should not be taken.

"Making a recommendation of what drugs to take or not to take, that’s the practice of medicine. The FDA can’t practice medicine."

 

Ebionite

Well-Known Member
The present study used the state-of-the-art method of actuarial science to estimate excess mortality
in the federal states of Germany in the three pandemic years (04/2020 to 03/2023). The estim-
ated excess mortality showed substantially variance across the federal states. The exploration of
several key state-specific quantities revealed that only two quantities showed a strong correlational
relationship with the observed excess mortality: COVID-19 deaths and the COVID-19 vaccination
rate. While the excess mortality in the first and second pandemic year was strongly correlated
with the reported number of deaths and infections, in the second and third pandemic years, an
increasingly stronger relationship between excess mortality and the vaccination rate was observed.
Contrary to what would be expected with an effective vaccination, positive instead of negative
correlations were observed: the more vaccinations were administered in a federal state, the greater
the increase in excess mortality.

 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
You have yet to explain what is relevant about black box warnings which are specifically that there are known instances of major negative reactions in spite of the general utility of a given procedure.
Anecdotes are nice, but they are not evidence that there is a problem with the system.
If you were not informed, that is not the failure of the black box warning system, but of the person who prescribed the treatment to you.
You seem to be arguing in this post and many that anecdotal evidence is more than just that. Feel free to rewrite statistical analysis, but you will not do it here.
I'd be an idiot not to pay attention to personal experience. And I'll share it if I like.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
I 'need' to do no such thing. Just as you do not need to watch the video... I would much rather let the person speak for himself, in his own words, than me making 'wrong' assumptions on his behalf or wrongly interpret what he means to say.

And as far as you 'quoting' Wikipedia as a reliable source to prove he is unreliable, says quite a bit about how serious you take your resources.
At least I try to let you come to your own conclusions through a source 'from the horses mouth'.
You cited a cardiologist interviewed on the Joe Rogan Show as your source and you're admonishing others for leaning on unreliable resources?
Are you trying to be ironic?

Sheesh, at least Wiki has footnotes.

You posted some quack that Joe Rogan interviewed and we should take his outlandish views seriously because ... ?
Has this guy even published anything on the subject matter? How about posting that instead? I'd rather pour through a scientific paper than listen to 3 hours of the Joe Rogan Show.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
One of the most explosive claims Kennedy made was about the suppression of COVID-19 treatments like Ivermectin.

He said that the FDA’s discouragement of such treatments was not based on science but on a desire to push the vaccine agenda.

“By depriving people of Ivermectin, many, many people, millions of people around the globe, died, and they didn’t need to,” Kennedy said.


He's wrong, of course.

While you all whine and moan about how you think the vaccine is harming people, you push for the use of a drug that has never been found to be effective in preventing or treating COVID, and instead, has caused actual harm to people. You conspiracy nuts really need to get your priorities in order.

 

Ebionite

Well-Known Member
Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., is asking two federal health agencies to review new data from the government of the Czech Republic on mortality rates from COVID-19 vaccines.

Johnson—who has conducted oversight into the government’s handling of the pandemic—wrote Wednesday to Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Dr. Robert M. Califf as well as Dr. Mandy K. Cohen, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“The Czech data evidences the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine (Spikevax) increased all-cause-mortality (ACM), as measured over a 12-month period from the time of vaccination for every age, compared to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (Comirnaty),” Johnson writes in the letter to Califf and Cohen, a copy of which was obtained by The Daily Signal.

 
Top