German nurse avoids jail after injecting thousands with saltwater shot instead COVID vaccine

a reply to: Asmodeus3

You don't seem to have a clue how vaccine trials and testing works do you?
Other than the amount of money spent to speed up moving onto the next testing phases please post with evidence how this differs to all other vaccine testing?
I await your next flip flopping......

a reply to: Kurokage

are you honestly suggesting money can speed up the necessary trial times, that's pretty awesome if it were true

these are the phases for human trial, we implemented these rules to make sure pharma doesn't harm our health, for their wealth.

What happens in phase 0? Phase 0 of a clinical trial is done with a very small number of people, usually fewer than 15. Investigators use a very small dose of medication to make sure it isn’t harmful to humans before they start using it in higher doses for later phases. If the medication acts differently than expected, the investigators will likely to do some additional preclinical research before deciding whether to continue the trial. What happens in phase I? During phase I of a clinical trial, investigators spend several months looking at the effects of the medication on about 20 to 80 people who have no underlying health conditions. This phase aims to figure out the highest dose humans can take without serious side effects. Investigators monitor participants very closely to see how their bodies react to the medication during this phase. While preclinical research usually provides some general information about dosing, the effects of a medication on the human body can be unpredictable. In addition to evaluating safety and ideal dosage, investigators also look at the best way to administer the drug, such as orally, intravenously, or topically. According to the FDA, approximately 70 percentTrusted Source of medications move on to phase II. What happens in phase II? Phase II of a clinical trial involves several hundred participants who are living with the condition that the new medication is meant to treat. They’re usually given the same dose that was found to be safe in the previous phase. Investigators monitor participants for several months or years to see how effective the medication is and to gather more information about any side effects it might cause. While phase II involves more participants than earlier phases, it’s still not large enough to demonstrate the overall safety of a medication. However, the data collected during this phase helps investigators come up with methods for conducting phase III. The FDA estimates that about 33 percent Trusted Sourceof medications move on to phase III. ADVERTISEMENT What happens in phase III? Phase III of a clinical trial usually involves up to 3,000 participants who have the condition that the new medication is meant to treat. Trials in this phase can last for several years. The purpose of phase III is to evaluate how the new medication works in comparison to existing medications for the same condition. To move forward with the trial, investigators need to demonstrate that the medication is at least as safe and effective as existing treatment options. To do this, investigators use a process called randomization. This involves randomly choosing some participants to receive the new medication and others to receive an existing medication. Phase III trials are usually double-blind, which means that neither the participant nor the investigator knows which medication the participant is taking. This helps to eliminate bias when interpreting results. The FDA usually requires a phase III clinical trial before approving a new medication. Due to the larger number of participants and longer duration or phase III, rare and long-term side effects are more likely to show up during this phase. If investigators demonstrate that the medication is at least as safe and effective as others already on the market, the FDA will usually approve the medication. Roughly 25 to 30 percentTrusted Source of medications move on to phase IV. What happens in phase IV? Phase IV clinical trials happen after the FDA has approved medication. This phase involves thousands of participants and can last for many years. Investigators use this phase to get more information about the medication’s long-term safety, effectiveness, and any other benefits. The bottom line Clinical trials and their individual phases are a very important part of clinical research. They allow the safety and effectiveness of new drugs or treatments to be properly assessed before being approved for use in the general public.

let's see if you spot any inconsistencies with the human trials for the covid vaccine?

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3

You don't seem to have a clue how vaccine trials and testing works do you?
Other than the amount of money spent to speed up moving onto the next testing phases please post with evidence how this differs to all other vaccine testing?
I await your next flip flopping......

I am not the one who doesn't have a clue.
You need to reflect on the statements you make and in your vaccine apologetics.

As someone said in another thread about your rhetoric

You are defending Pfizer by proxy. And you're stretching out towards infinity to deny that these experimental Covid drugs aren't the reason for massive debilitating side effects being reported on an unprecedented scale, which is also defending Pfizer and Moderna even if you didn't intend it that way, that is the bottom line.

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3

You don't seem to have a clue how vaccine trials and testing works do you?
Other than the amount of money spent to speed up moving onto the next testing phases please post with evidence how this differs to all other vaccine testing?
I await your next flip flopping......

Speed up the process?!?!
You seem not to have a single clue about what clinical phase trials are and how long they take to be completed. You are parroting a narrative that fortunately many nurses and professionals refused to do so. Including the nurse in this thread but I would have done it differently.

a reply to: Terpene


If you ask him whether the vaccines are safe and effective he doesn't reply back.

If you also ask him if he knows the medium or long term effects of these vaccines he still avoids the answer

If you keep asking him about transmission and infection he still doesn't answer.

But at the end he says that the vaccines were tested in humans before released in the general population. He confuses injecting individuals and looking for an immune response to actual testing where transmission, infection, short, medium, and long term effects are established. The term 'testing' has taken a new meaning in the field of vaccine apologetics.

I am sure that the nurse for which the thread is made, knew about the various 'shortcuts', serious adverse reactions, deaths, and the rest.

This is from his reply in the other page

The Covid vaccine trials happened at breakneck speed, but they didn't skip any steps - they were able to move faster because so many people were involved and other projects were put aside.

You must be very naive to believe in such nonsense. Just as others believed that by getting vaccinated they will protect granny. At least they wanted to do good in this case and protect the elders.

a reply to: Terpene

How about posting a link to site or is that to much to ask?

Some are over simplified but they are all the same...
CDC

University of Oxford

NIH

British Heart foundation

WHO

Science Australia

RWJB Health

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Terpene

How about posting a link to site or is that to much to ask?

Some are over simplified but they are all the same...
CDC

University of Oxford

NIH

British Heart foundation

WHO

Science Australia

RWJB Health

These are links and not explanations.
Do you know what the medium and long term effects are? The benefit to risk ratio in all groups?

Are the vaccines safe and effective? According to who?

How can you say they are safe and effective when you dint know anything about them?

You are defending Pfizer by proxy. And you're stretching out towards infinity to deny that these experimental Covid drugs aren't the reason for massive debilitating side effects being reported on an unprecedented scale, which is also defending Pfizer and Moderna even if you didn't intend it that way, that is the bottom line

The nurse wasn't convinced about the safety and effectiveness of these vaccines.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

You can't stop with your denial, flip flopping, attempts at insults and making threads drift can you?
This is a thread about a German Nurse commiting crimes and in my opinion, fraud.

You attempt to force your opinion onto others who don't agree with you. You've rambled on and on about knowing what the Judges and Nurse were thinking at court which is just your assumption and when other members don't agree you, you bombard them, like you're doing here, always attempting to have the last word even if that means moving the goal post when you're wrong.

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3

You can't stop with your denial, flip flopping, attempts at insults and making threads drift can you?
This is a thread about a German Nurse commiting crimes and in my opinion, fraud.

You attempt to force your opinion onto others who don't agree with you. You've rambled on and on about knowing what the Judges and Nurse were thinking at court which is just your assumption and when other members don't agree you, you bombard them, like you're doing here, always attempting to have the last word even if that means moving the goal post when you're wrong.

I have already said above the nurse wasn't convinced in relation to the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines and that's why she acted this way.

But are you convinced? Do you think these products are safe and effective?

Do you know what the medium and long term effects are? The benefit to risk ratio in all groups?
Do they prevent transmission?

How can you say they are safe and effective when you don't know anything about them.

As for the judges, they were not convinced as it seems about anything. And didn't want to jail the nurse.

She walked free.

"No crime was committed as no victim was created." - Me

a reply to: baggy7981

If no crime was committed how come she got a suspended prison sentence?

After being found guilty?

a reply to: Asmodeus3

The links I posted all describe how vaccination trials work (some are over simplified, but that could help you!). I'm not like you and I'm not trying to force my opinion onto others.

The Nurse was found guilty in a court of law and was also struck off by her professional body for fraudulantly injecting patients with a saline solution. You've made multiple claims knowing what the Judge must be thinking, that was purely an assumption on your part.

I'm glad the Nurse has been removed from her post and recieved a suspended sentence, imagine if in the future she let her misguided beliefs based on social media posts interfere with something like this...

Daily Mail

Covid shot maker Moderna hails 'new paradigm' as its mRNA vaccine slashes risk of relapse or death in skin cancer patients by 44%
A cancer vaccine that uses the same technology as Covid shots has been shown to slash the risk of tumors returning in advanced melanoma patients.

The shot, combined with an immunotherapy drug, reduced the chance of relapse or death in sufferers after surgery by 44 percent, compared to the drug on its own

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3

The links I posted all describe how vaccination trials work (some are over simplified, but that could help you!). I'm not like you and I'm not trying to force my opinion onto others.

The Nurse was found guilty in a court of law and was also struck off by her professional body for fraudulantly injecting patients with a saline solution. You've made multiple claims knowing what the Judge must be thinking, that was purely an assumption on your part.

We all know how vaccination trails work. It is you who seems to be struggling with the basics thinking you can speed up the process...

If that was true then what are the medium and long term effects? I have probably asked you a dozen times but I don't think you can give an answer...

Yes I know that you are disappointed in the decision not to jail the nurse but we can all see why this happened. The judges were not sure about her motives. That's a fact not a speculation. But do you think they have more doubts about other things maybe? Yes, no? They could be 'anti-vaxxers' by the way...

a reply to: Asmodeus3

I don't know the applicable German law under which the Nurse was charged, or the relevant mitigating factors that the Chamber had to consider or any of the relevant sentencing guidelines that they had to consider.

Do you?

If not you are just speculating and projecting your own beliefs onto the case to further your own agenda.

So, I will treat your opinions on the case with all possible due respect.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

I don't know the applicable German law under which the Nurse was charged, or the relevant mitigating factors that the Chamber had to consider or any of the relevant sentencing guidelines that they had to consider.

Do you?

If not you are just speculating and projecting your own beliefs onto the case to further your own agenda.

So, I will treat your opinions on the case with all possible due respect.

From yesterday's posts at least we know why she wasn't jailed

The 39-year-old had additionally posted several social media posts where she openly emphasised her skeptical views regarding Covid-19 vaccines.

When questioned by police, she admitted to using saline solution but had said she only did it because she had accidentally broken a vial containing six shots and was ashamed to tell her colleagues.

She had also claimed that it was a one-time incident, but was immediately sacked after antibody tests that were carried out on the affected people confirmed authorities' suspicions.

The accused had shared various conspiracy theories on the Internet and on social media,” the court spokesperson said, per the Mail. “However, the chamber could not determine with the necessary certainty that this set of ideas was the motive for her actions and that she then acted to sabotage a vaccination campaign.”

The first three paragraphs are from the left-wing mirror and the last from some right wing mail.

What agenda are you talking about?! Ha!

There was an agenda by the State and the Pharma to vaccinate as many as possible through coercion and pressures. That was a real and dangerous agenda.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

No.

We know what she told the Police.

Like I said, do you claim to know about the relevant law etc that I just asked you about?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

No.

We know what she told the Police.

Like I said, do you claim to know about the relevant law etc that I just asked you about?

I think know why they didn't jail her

The accused had shared various conspiracy theories on the Internet and on social media,” the court spokesperson said, per the Mail. “However, the chamber could not determine with the necessary certainty that this set of ideas was the motive for her actions and that she then acted to sabotage a vaccination campaign.”

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Your agenda is plain for all to see and your deflections don't really help with the reason(s) why the Nurse was not jailed.

It's all just speculation.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

I don't think that the Daily Mail is generally considered to be an authority on legal matters. Let alone on foreign jurisdictions.