FDA to Link China Virus "Vaccine" to Guillain-Barré Syndrome

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

1) What Cycle Threshold was used?

2) Provide proof of your hospital's Cycle Threshold.

3) Provide proof (other than your obviously biased anecdotal opinion) that all China Virus tests performed on " unvaccinated" in your hospital were negative.

How come I'm vacinated and still have negative PCR tests?

And most of the people I work with?

How do they even determine which ones to say are vacinated or not at the lab?

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Havamal
99.5 percent of current US Covid deaths are among the un-vaxed.

Prove it.

BOGUS stats...
It wouldn't matter anyway...

CDC PCR tests scanned "vaccinated" at a much lower cycle threshold (28 CT or less).
PCR tests on "UN vaccinated" scanned @ 35-45 CT showing much higher FALSE positives.

GO TO 30:30 in Video:
www.algora.com...

In short...
"Vaccinated" show up as NOT having CV.
"Un-vaccinated" show up as HAVING CV.

Interesting that Fauci's 95%-99% matches the SAME % for predicted FALSE positives at a PCR test scan cycle threshold of 35-45 for the "UN-Vaccinated"..

a reply to: IAMTAT

I don't need to provide you proof of anything, they used the same testing for everyone, there wasn't even a way to know if people were vaccinated. We had a few people who were asymptomatic come back positive out of everyone tested. You don't get to just make up lies with zero evidence then demand people with first hand experience provide proof so you can ignore it. I have already sourced enough data proving the efficacy of the vaccine, you enjoy ignorance for some reason. You're like those morons at CNN who would always ignore what Trump actually said and then make up lies about things.

That's why I'm asking as well.

Here in the UK all PCR tests are done and then sent off to labs that are private companies, as I work on a testing site I know for a fact that we don't even always know which lab they are going to.

Also how do they rig it with an lft? They don't even go to the lab but will aside from the lack of precision give the same results within the limits of their ability.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: IAMTAT

I don't need to provide you proof of anything, they used the same testing for everyone, there wasn't even a way to know if people were vaccinated. We had a few people who were asymptomatic come back positive out of everyone tested. You don't get to just make up lies with zero evidence then demand people with first hand experience provide proof so you can ignore it. I have already sourced enough data proving the efficacy of the vaccine, you enjoy ignorance for some reason. You're like those morons at CNN who would always ignore what Trump actually said and then make up lies about things.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
They don't say it won't. They say it's possible to still spread. If 100 people get the vaccine and one goes on to spread it, then it's possible, even though the other 99 didn't.

Yes...

Or...

If 100 people get the jab, and 99 go on to spread it, then it is possible, even though one of them didn't.

The fact is, it is pure speculation, because there is now way to prove it ... at all... ever.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: IAMTAT

I don't need to provide you proof of anything

You do...if you expect to be believed by others.

there wasn't even a way to know if people were vaccinated.

That's odd...since you also just said:

Then why did almost every PCR test run at my hospital come back negative on unvaccinatedpeople?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You've been caught in a contradiction.

You say "there wasn't even a way to know if people were vaccinated"...then, immediately claim to know who WAS "unvaccinated" ("Then why did almost every PCR test run at my hospital come back negative on unvaccinated people?").

You don't get to just make up lies with zero evidence then demand people with first hand experience provide proof

You made a claim that was anecdotal in nature...I have every right to ask you to "provide proof" (which you could not do)...especially when you exhibit such clear bias in your statements on the matter.

As I've clearly just shown...your anecdotal claims are contradictory.

You're like those morons at CNN

Childish and petty.
Please remember that we're not in the Mud Pit, Occam.

a reply to: nonspecific

The people in the lab have literally zero way to know if they got the vaccine.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Yes, I work inpatient at a large hospital, I would ask. I am not working in the lab. If someone was asymptomatic we were supposed to don full PPE to get the sample to send to lab. If they were double vax most of us ignored that policy. Do you think the lab workers can read our minds?

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
They don't say it won't. They say it's possible to still spread. If 100 people get the vaccine and one goes on to spread it, then it's possible, even though the other 99 didn't.

Yes...

Or...

If 100 people get the jab, and 99 go on to spread it, then it is possible, even though one of them didn't.

The fact is, it is pure speculation, because there is now way to prove it ... at all... ever.

False, we have several studies, and they all show almost no one vaccinated develops an infection and while we dont know the exact numbers, the percent of vaccinated people who can spread covid is extremely small.

Of 9535 workers tested, 379 ended up testing positive after their first dose of vaccination, but only 7 got Covid after full vaccination.
www.nejm.org...

You can't pass it on if it's not in your system.

Ahhh I see. I agree.

a reply to: TheGoondockSaint

a reply to: IAMTAT

Amazing how all these warnings start accumulating AFTER millions of people have already been pressured to get the jab.

In true Washington DC fashion. If you want to know the side effects of the jab, you got to take the jab.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

False, we have several studies

Amazing how these studies are done super fast huh? usually studies like these ones should take years not months or weeks and then have a report out.

the percent of vaccinated people who can spread covid is extremely small.

Because you believe the so called "study" never mind the ever last unknown factors of these saint send covid vaccines which your denying the side effects of them.

For the same media. Blood Clots weren't a problem when people were being vaccinated and when the problem became the problem they claimed that it was a rare thing it was a rare thing. "Please believe us"

Till the numbers were actually rising.

Blood clots are a known problem for those with covid 19.

What needs to be determined is are the blood clots caused by the vaccine and why or are they caused by people already having covid 19 when they had a vaccination.

The maths clearly show that blood clots are rare, it's just a basic calculation.

originally posted by: HawkEyi
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

False, we have several studies

Amazing how these studies are done super fast huh? usually studies like these ones should take years not months or weeks and then have a report out.

the percent of vaccinated people who can spread covid is extremely small.

Because you believe the so called "study" never mind the ever last unknown factors of these saint send covid vaccines which your denying the side effects of them.

For the same media. Blood Clots weren't a problem when people were being vaccinated and when the problem became the problem they claimed that it was a rare thing it was a rare thing. "Please believe us"

Till the numbers were actually rising.

a reply to: HawkEyi

They do? Can you link me some studies done on a new virus that emerged that killed hundreds of thousands in the US and they did a 5 year study on it before rolling the vaccine out?

As far as blood clots go, can you show me the number of people who got blood clots from the vaccine with no covid infection, and then give me the number of those with blood clots from covid? If you are going to talk about a problem, you need to give numbers, like I always do.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: IAMTAT

Amazing how all these warnings start accumulating AFTER millions of people have already been pressured to get the jab.

In true Washington DC fashion. If you want to know the side effects of the jab, you got to take the jab.

So they are supposed to know the side effects on people, including 1 in a million chance side effects, before anyone even gets it? Can you explain to me and them how they would do it?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: IAMTAT

Amazing how all these warnings start accumulating AFTER millions of people have already been pressured to get the jab.

In true Washington DC fashion. If you want to know the side effects of the jab, you got to take the jab.

What's worse would be that the manufacturers already knew the side effects...but consciously chose not to warn people before they take it.

This is a unique situation, where Pharma doesn't have to worry about lawsuits when people die from their product.

How did they know the side effects?

More importantly when and how did we find out they knew about the side effects?



a reply to: IAMTAT

originally posted by: nonspecific
How did they know the side effects?




a reply to: IAMTAT

Shouldn't they have known them BEFORE they started injecting it into millions of people?

It's like FORD knew Pintos exploded BEFORE they started selling them to people...but figured they could absorb the lawsuits and still make a profit...so they didn't recall them or tell anyone before it went on the market.

In the case of the "vaccines"...the manufacturers don't even have to worry about lawsuits.

But in order to have known they must have been fully trialed right?

So if everyone is convinced they have not been tested and should not even be used yet how can they have the data to show all the side effects?

It can't be both those things can it.

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: nonspecific
How did they know the side effects?




a reply to: IAMTAT

Shouldn't they have known them BEFORE they started injecting it into millions of people?

It's like FORD knew Pintos exploded BEFORE they started selling them to people...but figured they could absorb the lawsuits and still make a profit...so they didn't fix it or tell anyone before it went on the market.

In the case of the "vaccines"...the manufactures don't even have to worry about lawsuits.