Notes on NUREMBERG. COVID vaccine deaths & adverse events reported thus far in the EU. UK. & USA.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Do you think a lot of the statistics were manually adjusted to show a lot of the number "6"?

I’d say there’s a 2/3 chance.

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

They certainly don't seem worried by the fact that they are blatantly violating the Nuremberg Code, do they?

That's what gave me pause for a second... Maybe the nazis where never defeated?

You know that famous trick evil tries to play on us...

Operation Paperclip.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

40,666 deaths / 6,609,365,535 doses x 100 = a dose-fatality ratio of 0.000615 %.

In the case of COVID-19, the disease, using current global numbers:

4,894,969 deaths / 240,417,380 registered cases x 100 = a case-mortality ratio of 2.036 %.

So...

So... 6.6 million are now either dead or stuck with a life long debilitating condition that they wouldn't have otherwise had.

But hey, at least they can't catch Covid now, hey?

Oh wait...

Deaths within 2 weeks of taking the jab aren't counted. Deaths after that are often blamed on something else since it's been too long since the jab for it to be the cause. The real count is orders of magnitude higher than reported, at least by 10X, possibly 100X yet the pressure to take it goes on. This IS genocide.

One thing with the first Nuremberg, it happened after the war ended. For now we are still in the trenches of this information battlefield. I don't know what that moment of storming the eagles nest will be? How Fauci can be busted lying to congress yet still carry on, we are not there yet.

Keep punchin and blowing away that ignorance.

Their crimes against humanity are piling sky high. We all have to come together all over Earth and eradicate thge evil in our own home towns and regions.

originally posted by: Chalcedony
a reply to: shaemac

Didn't the NIH conduct drug trials on unwitting foster children? Pretty sure I read that somewhere let me search real fast. Hopefully back with a link.

Edit. Here is an article about it. www.cbsnews.com...

Government-funded researchers tested AIDS drugs on hundreds of foster children over the past two decades, often without providing them a basic protection afforded in federal law and required by some states, an Associated Press review has found.

The research funded by the National Institutes of Health spanned the country. It was most widespread in the 1990s as foster care agencies sought treatments for their HIV-infected children that weren't yet available in the marketplace.

The practice ensured that foster children - mostly poor or minority - received care from world-class researchers at government expense, slowing their rate of death and extending their lives. But it also exposed a vulnerable population to the risks of medical research and drugs that were known to have serious side effects in adults and for which the safety for children was unknown.

So it wasn't unwitting and I guess it helped them some. But the article does say that a lot of the foster children involved in the trials did not have the advocate required to protect their best interests in the trials and...

Many studies that enlisted foster children involved early Phase I and Phase II research - the riskiest - to determine side effects and safe dosages so children could begin taking adult "cocktails," the powerful drug combinations that suppress AIDS but can cause bad reactions like rashes and organ damage.

a reply to: chr0naut

So you agree that people who have no symptoms and have not tested positive should not have to wear a mask then, right?

a reply to: chr0naut

40,666 deaths / 6,609,365,535 doses x 100 = a dose-fatality ratio of 0.000615 %.

In the case of COVID-19, the disease, using current global numbers:

4,894,969 deaths / 240,417,380 registered cases x 100 = a case-mortality ratio of 2.036 %.

So...

chr0naut

I do not understand why ONE flipping death is ok…much less THOUSANDS.

AND I do not understand why MILLIONS of disabling conditions from taking the experimental toxic vax is ok…

ESPECIALLY from a MANDATED ILLEGAL EXPERIMENTAL and toxic vaccine for a disease renamed covid from the flu and for which, there exists IVERMECTIN and HCQ remedies that doe not maim and/or kill.

The SHAME of supporting the swamp's horrific agenda.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

FlyinTheOintment

I heard the Nuremberg scientists were relocated to the US to work here.

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Also note that he was using the inflated numbers for cases registered, where we know that in fact there are far, far fewer cases in reality, hence the mortality rate is ridiculously low for COVID, far lower than claimed in his post.

a reply to: AccessDenied

Yes... so the USA hates nazis so much they'd let the commies subvert their nazi run nation?

Is that the Plan?

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Chalcedony
a reply to: chr0naut

So how many asymptomatic cases who haven't been tested because they have no symptoms and don't realize they are infected should we be adding to that number of cases total? I am not talking about pre symptomatic. I mean literally asymptomatic. It does spread asymptomatically right? That's why everyone has to wear a mask, right?

Why would you consider someone who has no symptoms, and has not tested positive for COVID-19, as a 'case' of the illness?

What is to differentiate it between someone who just doesn't have COVID-19 at all?

And in a critical care situation, is the guessed at number relevant at all? I could see how it impacts on epidemic spread, but it's not relevant to the situation where you are accounting for the number of people who die of COVID-19.

Here are my answers:

1.Why would you consider someone who has no symptoms, and has not tested positive for COVID-19, as a 'case' of the illness?

A. Because it is well known that asymptomatic spread is a problem, which is the reason for the mask mandates.

2. What is to differentiate it between someone who just doesn't have COVID-19 at all?

A.That is why everyone has to wear a mask right?

3. And in a critical care situation, is the guessed at number relevant at all? I could see how it impacts on epidemic spread, but it's not relevant to the situation where you are accounting for the number of people who die of COVID-19.

A. Yes. It is very relevant. Without an accurate number of cases, how can you calculate the mortality rate of the virus?

Is somebody or some entity trying to dilute/neutralize the Human blood supply ?🤫

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

40,666 deaths / 6,609,365,535 doses x 100 = a dose-fatality ratio of 0.000615 %.

In the case of COVID-19, the disease, using current global numbers:

4,894,969 deaths / 240,417,380 registered cases x 100 = a case-mortality ratio of 2.036 %.

So...

So... 6.6 million are now either dead or stuck with a life long debilitating condition that they wouldn't have otherwise had.

That's 6.6 billion doses. And a tiny fraction of them have had any adverse reaction at all, based upon VAERS numbers.

But hey, at least they can't catch Covid now, hey?

Oh wait...

Vaccinations don't prevent people from catching a disease pathogen. They help them to have a rapid immune response that fights off the disease better and faster.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
Deaths within 2 weeks of taking the jab aren't counted. Deaths after that are often blamed on something else since it's been too long since the jab for it to be the cause. The real count is orders of magnitude higher than reported, at least by 10X, possibly 100X yet the pressure to take it goes on. This IS genocide.

Deaths and adverse reactions within 2 weeks are, very specifically, counted, as are deaths and adverse reactions that happen for months afterwards. For instance, syncope, which is fainting within 10 minutes of receiving the vaccine, is one of the things they are monitoring for and is one of the most immediate adverse reactions observed.

What'd be the point of systems like VARES if no-one can put anything into it due to some really stupid time restraints?

originally posted by: Chalcedony
a reply to: chr0naut

So you agree that people who have no symptoms and have not tested positive should not have to wear a mask then, right?

No, asymptomatic carriers are the more dangerous spreaders of a disease.

Read up on the historical US case of Mary Mallon, also known of as Typhoid Mary.

a reply to: chr0naut

6,626,502 injuries reported as at 15 September 2021. 

Is that a lie?

Please explain it to me.

originally posted by: CupcakeKarma
a reply to: chr0naut

40,666 deaths / 6,609,365,535 doses x 100 = a dose-fatality ratio of 0.000615 %.

In the case of COVID-19, the disease, using current global numbers:

4,894,969 deaths / 240,417,380 registered cases x 100 = a case-mortality ratio of 2.036 %.

So...

chr0naut

I do not understand why ONE flipping death is ok…much less THOUSANDS.

AND I do not understand why MILLIONS of disabling conditions from taking the experimental toxic vax is ok…

ESPECIALLY from a MANDATED ILLEGAL EXPERIMENTAL and toxic vaccine for a disease renamed covid from the flu and for which, there exists IVERMECTIN and HCQ remedies that doe not maim and/or kill.

The SHAME of supporting the swamp's horrific agenda.

They are trying to fight a disease that is far more dangerous than the vaccines. It's a fight against the spread of a deadly epidemic and sometimes there is regrettable, and unavoidable, collateral damage in the use of powerful tools

The alternatives to vaccinations are the far more destructive paths.

The Pfizer vaccine is no longer experimental. At no stage were the vaccinations themselves illegal. Nor have I heard of a mandate been ruled illegal in a court of law or being contrary to existing statute.

HQC, Ivermectin, Zpack's, and so forth, were distributed by the Brazilian and Indian governments, situations which are no longer occurring because they had no effect on the numbers, and some people suffered liver damage from overdosing in the hope that a higher dose would work.

Brazil’s Covid Crisis Is a Warning to the Whole World, Scientists Say

New treatment guidelines drop ivermectin, zinc, vitamins, hydroxychloroquine

originally posted by: Chalcedony

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Chalcedony
a reply to: chr0naut

So how many asymptomatic cases who haven't been tested because they have no symptoms and don't realize they are infected should we be adding to that number of cases total? I am not talking about pre symptomatic. I mean literally asymptomatic. It does spread asymptomatically right? That's why everyone has to wear a mask, right?

Why would you consider someone who has no symptoms, and has not tested positive for COVID-19, as a 'case' of the illness?

What is to differentiate it between someone who just doesn't have COVID-19 at all?

And in a critical care situation, is the guessed at number relevant at all? I could see how it impacts on epidemic spread, but it's not relevant to the situation where you are accounting for the number of people who die of COVID-19.

Here are my answers:

1.Why would you consider someone who has no symptoms, and has not tested positive for COVID-19, as a 'case' of the illness?

A. Because it is well known that asymptomatic spread is a problem, which is the reason for the mask mandates.

Do asymptomatic people die of COVID-19?

The quoted number was of case-mortality. The number means how many die, of those that get sick. If the people who don't get sick, also don't die, how could that contribute to the numbers in any meaningful way?

2. What is to differentiate it between someone who just doesn't have COVID-19 at all?

A.That is why everyone has to wear a mask right?

Yes, it has to do with the spread of the epidemic through unidentified paths. It is different to case-mortality.

3. And in a critical care situation, is the guessed at number relevant at all? I could see how it impacts on epidemic spread, but it's not relevant to the situation where you are accounting for the number of people who die of COVID-19.

A. Yes. It is very relevant. Without an accurate number of cases, how can you calculate the mortality rate of the virus?

A medical case of the disease presents symptomologically, confirmed by test, or simply by a sequence of positive tests. You cannot randomly include people who have shown no symptoms and have not been tested, just because you want to inflate some numbers.