RFK JR is on Rogan today if you want to check out his brand of crazy
- Thread starter jawatkins
- Start date
The 40% mortality increase is due to Covid and Covid sequelae, Idiot.
This is the kind of medical 'expert' he thinks we should rely on. 😁
Zoutman’s work as an infectious disease specialist has taken him around the world. Not only has he served as a consultant to the World Health Organization (WHO), the Kingston resident also held the position of physician-director of the board of Infection Prevention and Control Canada (IPAC Canada) for 12 years.
These days, Zoutman is a Queen’s University professor emeritus in the departments of pathology and molecular medicine (medical microbiology), of medicine (infectious diseases), public health sciences, and of biomedical and molecular sciences.
Before vaccines were available, the mortality rate for COVID-19 was “close to 10 per cent,” Zoutman recalled. “It was up to 20 per cent in the elderly. With the vaccine, we’ve reduced the mortality down into the single digits, except for those who are most vulnerable, who have heart conditions, lung conditions or immune compromised,” he continued. For those vulnerable groups, mortality rates vary from five to seven per cent.
“Long COVID syndrome occurs in at least 10 per cent of every infectious episode and may be as much as 30 per cent. Stop and think about that: if you get COVID twice a year, that’s a 20-60 per cent chance that you’re going to get long COVID. And the next year, it’s now 40-120 per cent. Almost certainly … you’re guaranteed statistically to acquire some form of long COVID.”
Finally, avoid indoor public places this fall, he said. “I haven’t eaten in a restaurant in almost four years, and I don’t intend to.”
Johnston Column: COVID response confounds SARS expert
As COVID-19 surges globally, a leading infectious disease specialist is confounded by the lack of pandemic mitigation measures in Ontario.
Seems like he has a pretty solid understanding of the issues.
And because he is very very old now, it may make sense for him to NOT eat out in public where he might be exposed. That's his personal decision.
Lol…mercury didn’t work. Aluminum didn’t work. I present to you the next big thing in the anti-vaxxer shit-to-throw-at-a-wall. Idiots…every single one.
Right, aluminum didn't work - for you. You boys lost on that point. Where are all the studies that indicate the safety of injected aluminum based adjuvants? How are you going to do that if HHS couldn't? Your attempts to insist injected aluminum should be assumed exactly the same as ingested aluminum is in no way valid, as common sense should indicate, let alone not supported by science. I've posted studies multiple times that suggest the pathways are very different, and that the safety is highly questionable at best.
HHS and CDC admitted there are zero studies they could rely on to support the safety of aluminum adjuvanted vaccines.
They included the aluminum component in the clinical trial placebos to indicate safety for the scheduled vaccines instead of inert placebos. Scandalous.
BTW, the DNA fragment issue has come up multiple times in the debate threads throughout the years. In no way is this a new argument.
Finally, the fact that there are MULTIPLE reasons to question vaccine safety is not a "win" against the "antivaxxers" as you attempt to suggest in your post. It's not a good thing for your position.
CDC and NIH Unable to Provide a Single Study to Support the Safety of Injecting Aluminum Adjuvants Despite its Widespread Use in Childhood Vaccines - ICAN - Informed Consent Action Network
A series of ICAN FOIA's has revealed CDC and NIH do not have a single study to support the safety of aluminum adjuvant in childhood vaccines.
icandecide.org
NIH Concedes it has No Studies Assessing the Safety of Injecting Aluminum Adjuvants - ICAN - Informed Consent Action Network
Vaccines given routinely during the first 6 months of life contain over 3500mg of aluminum. ICAN submitted a FOIA request to the NIH requested studies showing the safety of injecting aluminum - their search came back empty.
icandecide.org
Aluminum Archives
childrenshealthdefense.org
Lol…trigger warning!!Right, aluminum didn't work - for you. You boys lost on that point. Where are all the studies that indicate the safety of injected aluminum based adjuvants? How are you going to do that if HHS couldn't? Your attempts to insist injected aluminum should be assumed exactly the same as ingested aluminum is in no way valid, as common sense should indicate, let alone not supported by science. I've posted studies multiple times that suggest the pathways are very different, and that the safety is highly questionable at best.
HHS and CDC admitted there are zero studies they could rely on to support the safety of aluminum adjuvanted vaccines.
They included the aluminum component in the clinical trial placebos to indicate safety for the scheduled vaccines instead of inert placebos. Scandalous.
BTW, the DNA fragment issue has come up multiple times in the debate threads throughout the years. In no way is this a new argument.
Finally, the fact that there are MULTIPLE reasons to question vaccine safety is not a "win" against the "antivaxxers" as you attempt to suggest in your post. It's not a good thing for your position.
CDC and NIH Unable to Provide a Single Study to Support the Safety of Injecting Aluminum Adjuvants Despite its Widespread Use in Childhood Vaccines - ICAN - Informed Consent Action Network
A series of ICAN FOIA's has revealed CDC and NIH do not have a single study to support the safety of aluminum adjuvant in childhood vaccines.NIH Concedes it has No Studies Assessing the Safety of Injecting Aluminum Adjuvants - ICAN - Informed Consent Action Network
Vaccines given routinely during the first 6 months of life contain over 3500mg of aluminum. ICAN submitted a FOIA request to the NIH requested studies showing the safety of injecting aluminum - their search came back empty.Aluminum Archives
Where do people come up with this utter nonsense?
The board's resident medical expert wants to know where 'they' come up with all this nonsense?!? 🤣🤣🤣
Yeah
It's complete bullshit. You lap it all up.
Ask ANY of the guys on this board who are MDs.
JW? He wouldn't know a vaccine injury if it bit him in the ass. All that guy does is throw out insults and make you hope you never have to step into a medical establishment ever again. Also, since MDs have a half-day vaccine coverage in their schooling, I'd say some of them might not be the best people to ask, JW being a prime example.
But yeah, since you brought it up, I'd love to have the other MDs chime in on this thread.
Last edited:
Utter nonsense, not because you know anything about it but because it's badmouthing your precious.
Since you brought him up, Dr. Makis is the guy who tried to claim that 80 "young" Canadian doctors died from the "clot shot". Well...let's be accurate - he said "Sudden deaths of 80 young Canadian doctors since rollout of COVID-19 vaccines". Including one who died one week after the first vaccines were distributed, two who died in car accidents, a drowning, and a death while descending the world’s second highest mountain. Amazing side effects there, hoss.
One apparently got a shot that retroactively gave him a congenital heart defect. At least eleven of them died "suddenly" from cancer. Dr. Makis tried to claim one of those deaths as evidence citing that he died of pulmonary embolisms. GASP!!! Well, the guy had f'n lung cancer and nearly two thirds of patients with advanced lung cancer develop - you guessed it - pulmonary embolisms!
Best part - nearly half of the "young doctors" Makis cited were over 55.
Fvck him and every anti-vaxxer. Pond scum looks down on them and the world would be a far better place if every one of them developed a hybrid smallpoxian polio and died slow agonizing deaths. Not a single tear would be shed.
Never heard of it.
So you concede the aluminum point then. Still no studies. Good. Don't bring that bs up again if you can't back it up.
Last edited:
I don’t need to refute your bullshit. Nearly a century of aluminum salts in vaccines does that just fine. Keep posting bullshit from lying sacks of shit like Makis…it’s what you do best.
1) Better get back on your blood pressure meds. 2) The schedule ramped up in the 90's there skippy. Today's total injected aluminum (along with all other ingredient) load on the schedule, along with the administration timing, may have changed a bit from "nearly a century" ago, but you go on with your unreasonable unscientific comparisons.
Last edited:
So how exactly does the body purge that excess aluminum in the brain…skippy? What’s the biological pathway by which that occurs?
It was Gherardi's work that noted macrophages were taking up the aluminum, some transporting it to the brain, where some end up dying and depositing the aluminum, where it remains. This is like the 4th time we've gone over this with you.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cited a study in which researchers calculated the aluminum exposure from vaccines during infancy and found the total to be far below the minimal risk levels established by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.32 The aluminum-containing adjuvants are reported to have minimal adverse effects but are effective at improving the antibody response.33 There are reports of a chronic local granulomatous inflammation known as macrophagic myofasciitis in a small number of patients after receiving intramuscular vaccines containing aluminum.33,34 This condition allegedly results from a chronic inflammatory response to the residual adjuvant aluminum at the vaccination site that leads to a constellation of neurologic symptoms, including myalgia, arthralgia, chronic fatigue, weakness, and cognitive issues.34 The number of patients reported to have the neurologic symptoms is low compared with the number of vaccinated individuals. The World Health Organization Global Advisory Committee of Vaccine Safety has not found that the data support an association between aluminum adjuvants and chronic neurologic diseases.35 The aluminum content of vaccines has been blamed for autism spectrum disorders, but a large meta-analysis of cohort studies evaluating vaccination and the risk of autism revealed that in pooled data of 1 256 407 children, the odds ratio of developing autism after vaccination was 0.99, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.92 to 1.06.36
...
An average adult in the United States eats about 7–9 mg of aluminum per day in their food.
People are exposed to aluminum in some cosmetics, antiperspirants, and pharmaceuticals such as antacids and buffered aspirin.
• Antacids have 300–600 mg aluminum hydroxide (approximately 104– 208 mg of aluminum) per tablet, capsule, or 5 milliliter (mL) liquid dose. Little of this form of aluminum is taken up into the bloodstream.
• Buffered aspirin may contain 10–20 mg of aluminum per tablet • Vaccines may contain small amounts of aluminum compounds, no greater than 0.85 mg/dose.
Aluminum Effects in Infants and Children
Aluminum has no known biological function; however, it is a contaminant present in most foods and medications. Aluminum is excreted by the renal system, and patients with renal diseases should avoid aluminum-containing medications. Studies demonstrating long-term toxicity from the aluminum...
publications.aap.org
Quit posting out-of-context NONSENSE
In other words, you get more annual exposure to aluminum environmentally and in your diet, than from any vaccine.
What a worthless publication. All the references eventually lead to a dead end for you, just as I knew it would. Let's walk through this together.
First meaningful sentence:
"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has stated that the amount of aluminum exposure from following the recommended vaccine schedule is low and that the aluminum is not readily absorbed by the body.31"
31 takes you to a CDC informational page that covers a 2 major items. Frist it says: "Previous scientific research has shown the amount of aluminum exposure in people who follow the recommended vaccine schedule is low and is not readily absorbed by the body. Read the research on aluminum exposure and vaccines." That link takes you to a paper written in 2011 written by none other than Mitkus who committed the notorious original sin (with this very paper no less) of comparing common ingested aluminum dosages in food to injected aluminum dosages, which we've discussed of course has its obvious issues that we've gone over and over and over in these debate threads. (Insert facepalm image) That same CDC informational page has one other meaningful bit on aluminum: "An observational study [PDF – 10 Pages] published in September 2022 identified a possible association between exposure to aluminum from vaccines and later development of persistent asthma in a cohort of children who received care at healthcare organizations participating in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. CDC is not changing vaccine recommendations based on this single study, but further investigation is needed into this potential safety signal."
GREAT job Joe, and thank you CDC!
Next sentence:
"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cited a study in which researchers calculated the aluminum exposure from vaccines during infancy and found the total to be far below the minimal risk levels established by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.32"
What does 32 reference? THE SAME. DAMN. PAPER. You can't make this $*** up! (See previous comments on why the 32 (Mitkus paper) reference is invalid)
Next sentence:
"The aluminum-containing adjuvants are reported to have minimal adverse effects but are effective at improving the antibody response.33"
33 references a paper that does not speak kindly to aluminum adjuvants. It talks quite a bit about MMF, macrophagic myofaciitis, and references the exact Gherardi paper that talks about it and the pathway to the brain I was referencing earlier. Then it says: "Research using aluminium oxyhydroxide particles labelled with fluorescent functionalized nanodiamonds confirmed that 21 days post-immunization, the brains of mice contained, on average, 15 solid aluminium particles, and parallel studies in vitro confirmed that aluminium adjuvant was toxic to neuronal cell cultures [54]. This is consistent with mouse studies showing neurotoxic effects—including neural apoptosis and both motor and behavioural deficits—of an aluminium adjuvant [55, 56]. What contribution cumulative doses of aluminium adjuvants might make to human chronic disorders, such as Alzheimer’s disease [11, 57] or chronic bone disease [58], is simply unknown and warrants more thorough investigation. In particular, parenterally administered aluminium particles can behave very differently from soluble aluminium in the body, as these particles can be transported to unusual sites, such as the brain, after phagocytosis [54]...."
Thanks for helping me add validity to my previous points on MMF and the Trojan horse pathway to the brain.
Then, the conclusion states:
"This paper highlights the inherent difficulties of assessing adjuvant safety and the poor state of knowledge of the mechanisms underlying potential adjuvant toxicity. Even aluminium—an adjuvant in widespread human use for almost a century and that has been given to billions of subjects—still has unanswered questions regarding its potential connection to conditions such as MMF or Alzheimer’s disease.... Given the vital importance of adjuvants to modern vaccines, additional resources are needed to support research to provide better understanding of adjuvant action and how this might relate to adjuvant toxicity. New adjuvants are needed that improve vaccine potency without compromising tolerability or safety. A hypothesis warranting further exploration is whether it is possible to design a non-inflammatory adjuvant able to enhance vaccine immunogenicity without causing reactogenicity or compromising vaccine safety."
Not exactly the ringing endorsement to the safety of aluminum adjuvants that you were lead to believe. You couldn't have found a worse paper for your case if you tried! Great find!
Next:
The World Health Organization Global Advisory Committee of Vaccine Safety has not found that the data support an association between aluminum adjuvants and chronic neurologic diseases.35
Shall we get back into what the WHO really thinks about vaccine safety? Yeah I figured you probably didn't really want to re-visit those points. Unless you do. Let me know.
Moving on. Next sentence.
"The aluminum content of vaccines has been blamed for autism spectrum disorders, but a large meta-analysis of cohort studies evaluating vaccination and the risk of autism revealed that in pooled data of 1 256 407 children, the odds ratio of developing autism after vaccination was 0.99, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.92 to 1.06.36"
36 references another one of those fraudulent meta-analyses, a 2014 study that only covers....you guessed it....MMR and thimerosal. One of the biggest fatal flaws of the original "pro-vaxxer" arguments.
Holy cow Joe, what a big, fat nothingburger. If anything it emphasized MY points in its citation publications. You couldn't have picked a dumber paper for me to waste my time on.
First meaningful sentence:
"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has stated that the amount of aluminum exposure from following the recommended vaccine schedule is low and that the aluminum is not readily absorbed by the body.31"
31 takes you to a CDC informational page that covers a 2 major items. Frist it says: "Previous scientific research has shown the amount of aluminum exposure in people who follow the recommended vaccine schedule is low and is not readily absorbed by the body. Read the research on aluminum exposure and vaccines." That link takes you to a paper written in 2011 written by none other than Mitkus who committed the notorious original sin (with this very paper no less) of comparing common ingested aluminum dosages in food to injected aluminum dosages, which we've discussed of course has its obvious issues that we've gone over and over and over in these debate threads. (Insert facepalm image) That same CDC informational page has one other meaningful bit on aluminum: "An observational study [PDF – 10 Pages] published in September 2022 identified a possible association between exposure to aluminum from vaccines and later development of persistent asthma in a cohort of children who received care at healthcare organizations participating in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. CDC is not changing vaccine recommendations based on this single study, but further investigation is needed into this potential safety signal."
GREAT job Joe, and thank you CDC!
Next sentence:
"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cited a study in which researchers calculated the aluminum exposure from vaccines during infancy and found the total to be far below the minimal risk levels established by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.32"
What does 32 reference? THE SAME. DAMN. PAPER. You can't make this $*** up! (See previous comments on why the 32 (Mitkus paper) reference is invalid)
Next sentence:
"The aluminum-containing adjuvants are reported to have minimal adverse effects but are effective at improving the antibody response.33"
33 references a paper that does not speak kindly to aluminum adjuvants. It talks quite a bit about MMF, macrophagic myofaciitis, and references the exact Gherardi paper that talks about it and the pathway to the brain I was referencing earlier. Then it says: "Research using aluminium oxyhydroxide particles labelled with fluorescent functionalized nanodiamonds confirmed that 21 days post-immunization, the brains of mice contained, on average, 15 solid aluminium particles, and parallel studies in vitro confirmed that aluminium adjuvant was toxic to neuronal cell cultures [54]. This is consistent with mouse studies showing neurotoxic effects—including neural apoptosis and both motor and behavioural deficits—of an aluminium adjuvant [55, 56]. What contribution cumulative doses of aluminium adjuvants might make to human chronic disorders, such as Alzheimer’s disease [11, 57] or chronic bone disease [58], is simply unknown and warrants more thorough investigation. In particular, parenterally administered aluminium particles can behave very differently from soluble aluminium in the body, as these particles can be transported to unusual sites, such as the brain, after phagocytosis [54]...."
Thanks for helping me add validity to my previous points on MMF and the Trojan horse pathway to the brain.
Then, the conclusion states:
"This paper highlights the inherent difficulties of assessing adjuvant safety and the poor state of knowledge of the mechanisms underlying potential adjuvant toxicity. Even aluminium—an adjuvant in widespread human use for almost a century and that has been given to billions of subjects—still has unanswered questions regarding its potential connection to conditions such as MMF or Alzheimer’s disease.... Given the vital importance of adjuvants to modern vaccines, additional resources are needed to support research to provide better understanding of adjuvant action and how this might relate to adjuvant toxicity. New adjuvants are needed that improve vaccine potency without compromising tolerability or safety. A hypothesis warranting further exploration is whether it is possible to design a non-inflammatory adjuvant able to enhance vaccine immunogenicity without causing reactogenicity or compromising vaccine safety."
Not exactly the ringing endorsement to the safety of aluminum adjuvants that you were lead to believe. You couldn't have found a worse paper for your case if you tried! Great find!
Next:
The World Health Organization Global Advisory Committee of Vaccine Safety has not found that the data support an association between aluminum adjuvants and chronic neurologic diseases.35
Shall we get back into what the WHO really thinks about vaccine safety? Yeah I figured you probably didn't really want to re-visit those points. Unless you do. Let me know.
Moving on. Next sentence.
"The aluminum content of vaccines has been blamed for autism spectrum disorders, but a large meta-analysis of cohort studies evaluating vaccination and the risk of autism revealed that in pooled data of 1 256 407 children, the odds ratio of developing autism after vaccination was 0.99, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.92 to 1.06.36"
36 references another one of those fraudulent meta-analyses, a 2014 study that only covers....you guessed it....MMR and thimerosal. One of the biggest fatal flaws of the original "pro-vaxxer" arguments.
Holy cow Joe, what a big, fat nothingburger. If anything it emphasized MY points in its citation publications. You couldn't have picked a dumber paper for me to waste my time on.
Tons of studies from Nature, Science, the NIH, Pubmed, etc., all confirming the existence of, and potential dangers from, this switch in normal immunity to one dominated by IgG4 antibodies is dismissed as "complete bullshit" by the resident medical guru. Not surprising.
About the only good thing to come of this switch, which begins after the 2nd shot and accelerates with successive boosters, is that the risk for a catastrophic ADE episode starts to subside.*
* only to be replaced with an increase risk in cancers and other life-threatening diseases, which is to be expected when your immune system is shut off. The delusion is real, my friend.
You got it.Tons of studies from Nature, Science, the NIH, Pubmed, etc., all confirming the existence of, and potential dangers from, this switch in normal immunity to one dominated by IgG4 antibodies is dismissed as "complete bullshit" by the resident medical guru. Not surprising.
About the only good thing to come of this switch, which begins after the 2nd shot and accelerates with successive boosters, is that the risk for a catastrophic ADE episode starts to subside.*
* only to be replaced with an increase risk in cancers and other life-threatening diseases, which is to be expected when your immune system is shut off. The delusion is real, my friend.
And just look at that paper that Joe posted from 2019. When I first looked at it I thought to myself how in the hell did they figure out what actual aluminum adjuvant dosages were deemed acceptable without any recent studies that tested injected aluminum? I already knew there weren't any studies pre ~2019.
It's not until you click into the reference publications and find out what they actually say that you find the original Joe-posted paper is purposefully being misleading. Citing a study from 2011 that makes the fatal assumption that ingesting aluminum should be looked at the exact same as injecting aluminum (as if that should be even remotely acceptable in the scientific world). Then the other publications, one was basically saying injected aluminum safety is questionable and needs to be looked into further, and the other had nothing to do with aluminum but only looked at thimerosal and MMR. This complete and utter nonsense was peer reviewed and published in Pediatrics?
THAT right there my friend shows you the sad state of science these days. And people here are completely cool with it. 😟
Last edited:
You didn't respond to the question at all. Try reading it again and looking up the big words.
Everything that I typed is what the Gherardi study focused on. That's what I know. If you have something else in mind to add to the discussion you're free to post it, or go look it up yourself.
*sigh* Nothing that you typed addresses the question asked. You're denser than I thought. And that's saying a lot.
The amount of fraud committed by these people defies belief. You almost wonder why Merck even bothered to perform clinical trials when Plotkin proved that his boys in the FDA will approve them regardless of whether or not they've been tested...Right, aluminum didn't work - for you. You boys lost on that point. Where are all the studies that indicate the safety of injected aluminum based adjuvants? How are you going to do that if HHS couldn't? Your attempts to insist injected aluminum should be assumed exactly the same as ingested aluminum is in no way valid, as common sense should indicate, let alone not supported by science. I've posted studies multiple times that suggest the pathways are very different, and that the safety is highly questionable at best.
HHS and CDC admitted there are zero studies they could rely on to support the safety of aluminum adjuvanted vaccines.
They included the aluminum component in the clinical trial placebos to indicate safety for the scheduled vaccines instead of inert placebos. Scandalous.
BTW, the DNA fragment issue has come up multiple times in the debate threads throughout the years. In no way is this a new argument.
Finally, the fact that there are MULTIPLE reasons to question vaccine safety is not a "win" against the "antivaxxers" as you attempt to suggest in your post. It's not a good thing for your position.
CDC and NIH Unable to Provide a Single Study to Support the Safety of Injecting Aluminum Adjuvants Despite its Widespread Use in Childhood Vaccines - ICAN - Informed Consent Action Network
A series of ICAN FOIA's has revealed CDC and NIH do not have a single study to support the safety of aluminum adjuvant in childhood vaccines.NIH Concedes it has No Studies Assessing the Safety of Injecting Aluminum Adjuvants - ICAN - Informed Consent Action Network
Vaccines given routinely during the first 6 months of life contain over 3500mg of aluminum. ICAN submitted a FOIA request to the NIH requested studies showing the safety of injecting aluminum - their search came back empty.Aluminum Archives
According to Mary Holland, Kim Mack Rosenberg, and Eileen Iorio, co-authors of the book, The HPV Vaccine On Trial: Seeking Justice For a Generation Betrayed, “none of the participants in the [Gardasil] clinical trials received a true saline placebo,” which means the clinical trials failed to measure the effects of Gardasil against a true control.
Instead of receiving a placebo, clinical trial subjects were given aluminum-containing adjuvants and other chemical mixtures which masked adverse events and made Gardasil seem safer than it would have otherwise.
Merck Gardasil Clinical Trials
The truth behind the Merck Gardasil clinical trials. Information on the Gardasil lawsuits from leading pharmaceutical defect attorneys.
www.wisnerbaum.com
Meanwhile, 2012 called:
Aluminum Adjuvant Dose Guidelines in Vaccine Formulation for Preclinical Evaluations
You absorb some of the aluminum you ingest, too, idiot.
1997
In vivo absorption of aluminium-containing vaccine adjuvants using 26Al
You just stated that NO ONE has looked at "aluminum adjuvants" prior to 2019.
Eat your crow, you demented idiot.
Hell, he's eaten so much crow he caws.
