Dying after a vaccine is predictable and is a good thing. Did I read that right?

thumb_up26thumb_downchat_bubble9

More from LaurenceBacchus

Dr Kendrick on vaccine effectiveness. "Looking specifically at efficacy, on that list, it is usually stated that vaccines are rigorously tested for efficacy. Here is what the University of Oxford has to say in its site ‘Vaccine Knowledge Project.’ ‘Phase III trials gather statistically significant data on the vaccine’s safety and efficacy (how well it works). This means looking at whether the vaccine generates a level of immunity that would prevent disease, and provides evidence that the vaccine can actually reduce the number of cases.’ 5 However, this does not actually test whether a vaccine really does reduce the number of cases of a disease. As I wrote in the previous blog, even in population with a 98% vaccination rate against measles, a school population still suffered a measles outbreak, and many of those previously vaccinated suffered from measles. Which means that the statement from the Vaccine Knowledge Project…. and provides evidence that the vaccine can actually reduce the number of cases’ needs to be read very carefully. It could be taken to mean ‘provides all the evidence needed.’ Which is what it has been crafted to imply. However, it actually means ‘provides evidence regarding a ‘surrogate end-point’ which suggests that vaccines may reduce the number of cases.’ If you want to know if a vaccine really works, vaccinate a hundred thousand people against a disease. Do not vaccinate another hundred thousand people (matched and randomised) – and then see what happens. Then you will know how well your vaccine works. This is a requirement of all other forms of medical intervention (with provisos), but it is not a requirement for vaccines. A true efficacy study does not simply look at a ‘surrogate’ marker. It needs to study hard endpoints e.g. how many people are truly protected against the disease. Also, what the rate of adverse events may be. Of course, there are those who think that such a trial would be ridiculous and unethical. Here, I quote from a website KevinMD: ‘….as some have actually demanded, we must have a randomized controlled trial (RCT), the gold standard of clinical research. RCTs use random assignment of subjects to one group or the other, in this case vaccine or a placebo (fake vaccine), and ensure both the subjects and evaluation team be blinded to who got what. Think about this for a minute. They are demanding parents agree to subject their child to a trial in which they have a 50/50 chance of getting a fake vaccine. All this to satisfy the concerns of vaccine deniers. It would be incredibly unethical to do such a study, and no institutional review board (aka human studies committee) would ever approve such a thing. For such trials, there must be reasonable uncertainty about which group is getting the better treatment, and in this case, there is none. The bottom line is any vaccine skeptic who demands proof like this is being massively disingenuous. It’s akin to demanding a randomized controlled trial of parachutes.’ 6 What is being said here is that there is no uncertainty that vaccines work, so there is no need for a randomised controlled trial. The counter argument to this is simply to turn the argument inside out. Without an RCT, how do you know that vaccines work? Where is your evidence? Or does ‘just knowing that it works’, count?" https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2019/07/29/a-second-look-at-vaccination-answers-that-cannot-be-questioned/
162 views · Feb 3rd
"Since the beginning of this false pandemic, I’ve been offering compelling evidence that no one has proved SARS-CoV-2 exists. Then people ask, “So why are all these people dying?” I have explained that, many times, and in this article I’ll explain it again. First of all, the whole notion that COVID-19 is one health condition is a lie. COVID IS NOT ONE THING. This is both the hardest and simplest point to accept and understand. Don’t reject the existence of the virus and then say, “So what is THE cause of people dying?” There is no ONE CAUSE. There is no one illness. There is no “it.” By far, the biggest sources of illness we are dealing with are lung conditions: various kinds of pneumonia; flu and flu-like disease; TB; other unnamed lung/respiratory problems. THESE ARE BEING RELABELED “COVID.” It’s a repackaging scheme. People are dying for those traditional reasons, and their deaths are being called “COVID.” Thus, the old is artificially made new. It’s still old." https://snooze2awaken.com/2021/01/29/covid-if-there-is-no-virus-why-are-people-dying/
5.95k views · Jan 30th

More from LaurenceBacchus

Dr Kendrick on vaccine effectiveness. "Looking specifically at efficacy, on that list, it is usually stated that vaccines are rigorously tested for efficacy. Here is what the University of Oxford has to say in its site ‘Vaccine Knowledge Project.’ ‘Phase III trials gather statistically significant data on the vaccine’s safety and efficacy (how well it works). This means looking at whether the vaccine generates a level of immunity that would prevent disease, and provides evidence that the vaccine can actually reduce the number of cases.’ 5 However, this does not actually test whether a vaccine really does reduce the number of cases of a disease. As I wrote in the previous blog, even in population with a 98% vaccination rate against measles, a school population still suffered a measles outbreak, and many of those previously vaccinated suffered from measles. Which means that the statement from the Vaccine Knowledge Project…. and provides evidence that the vaccine can actually reduce the number of cases’ needs to be read very carefully. It could be taken to mean ‘provides all the evidence needed.’ Which is what it has been crafted to imply. However, it actually means ‘provides evidence regarding a ‘surrogate end-point’ which suggests that vaccines may reduce the number of cases.’ If you want to know if a vaccine really works, vaccinate a hundred thousand people against a disease. Do not vaccinate another hundred thousand people (matched and randomised) – and then see what happens. Then you will know how well your vaccine works. This is a requirement of all other forms of medical intervention (with provisos), but it is not a requirement for vaccines. A true efficacy study does not simply look at a ‘surrogate’ marker. It needs to study hard endpoints e.g. how many people are truly protected against the disease. Also, what the rate of adverse events may be. Of course, there are those who think that such a trial would be ridiculous and unethical. Here, I quote from a website KevinMD: ‘….as some have actually demanded, we must have a randomized controlled trial (RCT), the gold standard of clinical research. RCTs use random assignment of subjects to one group or the other, in this case vaccine or a placebo (fake vaccine), and ensure both the subjects and evaluation team be blinded to who got what. Think about this for a minute. They are demanding parents agree to subject their child to a trial in which they have a 50/50 chance of getting a fake vaccine. All this to satisfy the concerns of vaccine deniers. It would be incredibly unethical to do such a study, and no institutional review board (aka human studies committee) would ever approve such a thing. For such trials, there must be reasonable uncertainty about which group is getting the better treatment, and in this case, there is none. The bottom line is any vaccine skeptic who demands proof like this is being massively disingenuous. It’s akin to demanding a randomized controlled trial of parachutes.’ 6 What is being said here is that there is no uncertainty that vaccines work, so there is no need for a randomised controlled trial. The counter argument to this is simply to turn the argument inside out. Without an RCT, how do you know that vaccines work? Where is your evidence? Or does ‘just knowing that it works’, count?" https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2019/07/29/a-second-look-at-vaccination-answers-that-cannot-be-questioned/
162 views · Feb 3rd
"Since the beginning of this false pandemic, I’ve been offering compelling evidence that no one has proved SARS-CoV-2 exists. Then people ask, “So why are all these people dying?” I have explained that, many times, and in this article I’ll explain it again. First of all, the whole notion that COVID-19 is one health condition is a lie. COVID IS NOT ONE THING. This is both the hardest and simplest point to accept and understand. Don’t reject the existence of the virus and then say, “So what is THE cause of people dying?” There is no ONE CAUSE. There is no one illness. There is no “it.” By far, the biggest sources of illness we are dealing with are lung conditions: various kinds of pneumonia; flu and flu-like disease; TB; other unnamed lung/respiratory problems. THESE ARE BEING RELABELED “COVID.” It’s a repackaging scheme. People are dying for those traditional reasons, and their deaths are being called “COVID.” Thus, the old is artificially made new. It’s still old." https://snooze2awaken.com/2021/01/29/covid-if-there-is-no-virus-why-are-people-dying/
5.95k views · Jan 30th