CDC Says Covid Vaccines Do Not Kill - The CDC Then Reduces Potential Vax Deaths by 50 Percent.

They even admit pcr tests are faulty now as suspected long ago.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

a reply to: carewemust

Occam Sockem Robot incoming...

Where do they admit this?


a reply to: Athetos

originally posted by: underpass61
a reply to: carewemust

Occam Sockem Robot incoming...

There are people who whine all the time. Its safe to ignore them. Gets easier as the years pass.

Just say what you want and move on.

originally posted by: Athetos
They even admit pcr tests are faulty now as suspected long ago.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Expect to see a U.S. whistleblower coming forward to tell how the CDC has counted deaths TWICE in order to pump up the Covid-19 mortality numbers. One brave soul already did so in the United Kingdom.

i.e. Jane dies of heart-attack and has Covid-19. CDC places her death in both categories. 2 deaths in America attributed to Jane's death.

originally posted by: nonspecific

Take a look at the about us page on that source site.

It may/may not suprise you.

What about it do you find worth looking into and that might be surprising?

About TrialSiteNews

TrialSiteNews was launched to drive more interest and awareness in clinical research, as well as to develop trust and facilitate engagement of researchers and the public. TrialSite started toward the end of 2018, financed solely by the founder, to create a new disruptive force in the world of biomedical research.

TrialSite emphasizes the trial site organization and its staff, whether a hospital, health system, community clinic, or commercial research center, and the breakthroughs, challenges, best practices, and mishaps, all in a bid to provide more transparency for the broader population as to the nuts and bolts of clinical trials.

Mission & Values

TrialSite’s mission is to drive awareness, introduce transparency, and facilitate engagement among people all over the world, from pharmaceutical professionals and academic researchers to regulators and healthcare professionals along with a wide array of the consuming public. We value transparency, objectivity, and the scientific method in pursuit of the truth wherever it may lead us.

ETA: Nevermind, you're employing the genetic logical fallacy...again...and implying that because there are a couple people's pictures on the site that you don't like, all of the information is dubious or wrong. Got it.

I feel like the world has turned into a pancake and is in the process of being flipped and flopped.

Maybe the flat Earth theorists were right after all?

Who knows anymore?

Did I say anything negative?

I said it may or may not suprise you to see a couple of familiar faces involved.

It can't just be me that looks into the makeup of any sources they are not aware of surely.

I'll check the about us info before I've even read the first sentence as I find it's rather important.


a reply to: SlapMonkey

What can anybody expect? when you have companies that dominate our nations politics and then get to ride none fault liabilities, darn the sky is the limit.

Nothing to see here, go get the jab and praise our lord and savior big pharma, made sure to build that shrine at home, with their names on it.

You owed your live to big pharma, because lets face it now they own all human kind lives. their mark is been injected on anybody taking their crap.

a reply to: nonspecific

No, it's not just you--I do it, too, as do many others on this site.

I think that the difference seems to be that I have noticed a tendency with you to be quickly dismissive once you see a source that you don't like, but don't appear to do any real research into the information itself to see if it's true--maybe I'm wrong about that last part, but it doesn't come across that way. If I'm wrong, I apologize.

But, yes, you did say something negative about the two doctors that you call out later in the thread (after the comment to which I replied), so yes, you said something negative. And even implications say something, just using passive-aggressive words.

But I will say that it's better to be over-cautious than to just blindly believe everything, so, yeah, maybe I'm being a bit harsh on you, but maybe not. Regardless, no harm, no foul--we're all entitled to our opinions and implications.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: nonspecific

if you took it that i was speaking of you, makes me wonder now.

are you a paid shill working for a MSM going round spewing bovine fecal matter?

it's a well known fact that the vast majority of MSM's only hire or bring on experts shills that support their point of view, and those that come on for debates are mostly weak supporters of/from other side.

surprised you don't realize that.

He makes a living off of the casedemic so wants it to go on and on.
The things people will do for money.
Does that make him a shill?I let you decide.

originally posted by: RussianSpy
I feel like the world has turned into a pancake and is in the process of being flipped and flopped.

Maybe the flat Earth theorists were right after all?

Who knows anymore?

Mass chaos and confusion plays into the oppressor's hands. It's best to ignore the chaff (noise) and stay on target, like a properly programmed cruise missile!

The problem with this situation is that there's so much absolute tosh out there it does make you a bit jaded and maybe I do act rather quickly.
.
I imagine it's the same for some members when they see a "mainstream" source and instantly make a predetermined opinion.

In this case I'm already pretty confident that there is a more rational explanation than the sinister plot.

Firstly why would they not just fudge the figures in the first place?

Secondly as it's a system where anyone can report a death it's reasonable to guess that there will be a lot of duplicates on there. Old man dies and a doctor updates vears, then his son does the same. Maybe his own doctor thinks it should he noted and all of a sudden there's 3 reports and only one death. I'm not saying this is true but it seems far more plausible than they simply halved the cases for nefarious reasons and hoped no one would notice.

When that's my initial train of thought and then I see not one but two people who have been involved in some rather creative story telling regarding the pandemic is it really that hard to see why I'm coming to a pretty staunch conclusion?



a reply to: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: nonspecific

Take a look at the about us page on that source site.

It may/may not suprise you.



a reply to: carewemust

Dr. Robert Malone
The inventor of mRNA vaccines and RNA transfection, Dr. Malone has extensive research and development experience in the areas of pre-clinical discovery research, clinical trials, vaccines, gene therapy, bio-defense, and immunology.

a reply to: nonspecific

Yeah, but why change the numbers with no explanation? That's what gets me.

Usually when a government agency quietly does something, especially concerning a very hot issue at the time, it's generally not because they are being hyper-transparent and forthcoming.

Generally.

That I can't obviously answer.

I'm still guessing the answer is suitably uninteresting though.

It could even be a software glitch for all we know.



a reply to: SlapMonkey

What? The CDC lying to the American people? They have been lying to people all along, blowing things out of proportion to make people think they are doing good for America...probably so people will tell the government to pay them and their colleagues more for their services.

I haven't believed the relevance of what the CDC spreads for decades, they always twist everything to fit their desired plan.