It could have said “bassless” seeing as we’re talking about musician…
I was pointing this out to a friend. So it seems that the Astrazeneca shot is responsible for around 20,000 adverse reactions of about 700,000 people that have taken it, or around 3%. These are just the recorded ones. And these are just the ones that happened in the near term. Amazing that Sweden, the one country that appears to be following the Science had the least amount of adverse reactions to the Virus and the most amount of adverse reactions to the ‘Genetic Vaccines.’ There is something really really bizarre going on in the world right now.
I will say, my dad had to go back to the hospital again when his nose started bleeding again this time all night. They cauterised it or some such thing, hard to get the exact info from parents, and then he was ok to leave. The local doctor that was dealing with him had said that they were seeing lots of issues after the second dose of the ‘vaccine.’ I don’t think any of these are being recorded anywhere.
Hope he’s doing better and thanks for the continued insights.
It is being recorded, distributed across the internet by way of endless anecdotes, as noted in this topic Blood - Taking Down Humanity for example:
My own summary of reading anecdotes day in day that randomly occur for the last month or two, seems to tally with the local docs admission:
- 2/4 days something happens, and or,
- 2-3 weeks later something happens.
- 2nd shot onwards is when risk factor elevates dangerously.
Blood clots all round. Roll of the dice. Insane really.
Most of it is behind the paywall…
Pay the price peeps.
Follow the money.
This is a good interview with Dr Tess Lawrie who works for a consultancy that normally advises the WHO. She is perplexed as to why more merit is not being given to Ivermectin and she is quoting studies based on its effectiveness in this interview. This is with the British medical Youtuber that many of us were referring to last year. Personally I had stopped looking at his videos some time ago but I found this one very interesting. Another interesting point, you cannot get the FDA go ahead for an ‘emergency therapeutic’ unless there are no other drugs or treatments shown to have efficacy against a virus/disease.
Something very very dodgy is going on in the world.
This is common knowledge online for some time, but I didn’t have a direct link or time to follow it up. No idea if this is the case in the EU but now it makes sense when and why Trump introduced alternatives, early on, HCQ and others treatments, the media went to WAR… drinking/injecting breech etc. etc. the usual massive informational riddicule assault.
Contrast that to the super positive “father of the vaccine” coverage.
So like it’s WAR, it’s not dodgy, it’s serious. It’s a WAR.
Yup and FLCCC (Pierre Kory’s group) are now highlighting this as an issue too.
In the EU it is the same, not sure about UK now they’ve gone Brexit…
Regulation (EC) No 507/2006 unmet medical needs’ means a condition for which there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment authorised in the Community
EMA’s [CHMP]may grant a conditional marketing authorisation for a medicine if it finds that all of the following criteria are met:
- the benefit-risk balance of the medicine is positive;
- it is likely that the applicant will be able to provide comprehensive data post-authorisation;
- the medicine fulfils an unmet medical need;
- the benefit of the medicine’s immediate availability to patients is greater than the risk inherent in the fact that additional data are still required.
Here are the links re CMAs in the EU:
I can’t find an active link to [Regulation (EC) No 507/2006] - the hyperlink on the page is broken. It was working fine until maybe 2 months ago. Then it went and I found another one. Gone. PDF page so archive.is doesn’t grab it.
Note article 10 says everyone should be made aware that these are still CMA only. Compare to HSE document:
Guidance document. Path to this has changed since last time I looked too…
A ten year review - tl:dr there are an average of three per annum
Sadly we have our answer.
Psychological / biological.
Use the archived link if you can’t get past the regional block.
Archived link: https://archive.is/gzSqQ
Prediction: They’re gonna regret inventing the term “fully vaccinated”.
They’ll try to move the goal posts to say “fully vaccinated” means “constantly up to date with the latest variants”…but it won’t work.
Looks the first “safe” vaccine should be available pretty soon in the West.
The Valneva vaccine is a traditional inactivated virus vaccine. Just like the flu shot. So the adverse reaction rate should be very low.
All these vaccines are defacto placebos for SARs Cov 2 but if any vaccine needs to be taken for whatever personal reason the Valneva is first one in the West that is actually pretty safe.
So in order of nasty side effects
All mRNA vaccines. Dangerous as fuck and they have not a clue about long term effects. Responsible for most deaths of old people. And serious neurological damage in younger people.
The adenovirus vaccines. Probably not that dangerous. But past clinical trials show potential problems down the road. But nothing like the mRNA vaccines. Higher rate of mild adverse reactions than the current mRNA vaccines but far fewer deaths.
The inactivated virus vaccines. Traditional vaccines so very safe.
I agree with your points above jmc especially in relation to the mRNA ‘vaccines’, mind boggling to me that they are being pushed on people. The adenovirus vaccines are bringing modified DNA to cell nuclei if I’m not mistaken which still produce the spike proteins, or is this not the case? Still seems like potential for problems although maybe they are replicating the exact spike proteins unlike the mRNA which I recently learned are actually not using natural Uracil and are using in fact a modified version of Uracil. (I didn’t realise it was the Uracil they were modifying previously. This to me sounds insane. All to retain patent protection I imagine).
Good to see the traditional vaccines making it to Europe also.
Just as a separate post, this Doctor in the U.S. is stating the very obvious points that we are all making here but it’s good to see someone in the medical profession sticking their neck out to do it. It’s a very good thread below.