Crisis - Norway Funeral Homes Overwhelmed With The Dead

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

These are excuses for once more.

Where did I get it? There is a whole thread I have created about the mathematics of serious adverse reactions. But I see a pattern here. Whenever actual statistics are involved or actual cases of vaccine injuries and deaths verified by the coroner then these threads are not visited so much by those on the vaccine apology side.

I didn't read you thread, sorry,

Have you read the thread now?
Did you go to yt and watch the video yet?

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

These are excuses for once more.

Where did I get it? There is a whole thread I have created about the mathematics of serious adverse reactions. But I see a pattern here. Whenever actual statistics are involved or actual cases of vaccine injuries and deaths verified by the coroner then these threads are not visited so much by those on the vaccine apology side.

I didn't read you thread, sorry,

Have you read the thread now?
Did you go to yt and watch the video yet?

They seem to be going about matters they have never read or heard. But still they come up with various false conclusions.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

You said the majority had no clue about these matters . But you had no clue of how to work 1 serious adverse reaction per 800 vaccinees. In addition you claimed that this number came from some obscure video on Bitchute. Then you may have discovered there are articles which are based on publications.

You seem to just repeat yourself not remembering what I wrote the last 2 or 3 times you asked me this same thing...lol

I asked where is 1 per 800 written, you never told me... I searched for 1 per 800 and found nothing, and asked you after you would not answer me, if it came from a video which is not searchable then...

THE FUNNY PART IS YOU GOT THE 1 per 800 FROM A VIDEO...lol geez That is why you didn't tell me and then snorted some BS about my math because I didn't associate your 1 per 800 with this 12.5 per 10,000 buried deep in a document I didn't read, and you would not link to me to answer my simple question of where did you get the 1 per 800?

Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 10.1 and 15.1 per 10,000 vaccinated over placebo baselines of 17.6 and 42.2 (95 % CI −0.4 to 20.6 and −3.6 to 33.8), respectively. Combined, the mRNA vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated (95 % CI 2.1 to 22.9); risk ratio 1.43 (95 % CI 1.07 to 1.92). The Pfizer trial exhibited a 36 % higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group; risk difference 18.0 per 10,000 vaccinated (95 % CI 1.2 to 34.9); risk ratio 1.36 (95 % CI 1.02 to 1.83). The Moderna trial exhibited a 6 % higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group: risk difference 7.1 per 10,000 (95 % CI –23.2 to 37.4); risk ratio 1.06 (95 % CI 0.84 to 1.33). Combined, there was a 16 % higher risk of serious adverse events in mRNA vaccine recipients: risk difference 13.2 (95 % CI −3.2 to 29.6); risk ratio 1.16 (95 % CI 0.97 to 1.39).

You are a real hoot BTW...

No you are mistaken for once more.
The figure was presented independently by Dr Campbell but if you have seen my thread I got the figure from a peer-reviewed scientific publication which was also linked by Dr Campbell.

It's obvious you don't read any publications and/or scientific articles but you still try to come up with erroneous conclusions based on what you think it's science and research.

By the way, repetition is key for learning and understanding.

You are still in a denial by the way and why don't you read my thread? You will see from where I got the figure. But that's besides the point.

You are still engaging in vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

at this point a deep schism is appearing between the denialists and realists..

it was always going to be thus, as we face a similar situation to that faced by govs at the end of the great war, they could never repatriate the millions of coffins as no society could survive that scale of distress, the coffin trains would be endless.. their answer was the tombs of the unknow warriors/soldiers..

the thing is the death ended with the end of war but it feel as like the worst part of ours has been delayed and there are no slick answers for the denialists to grasp all they have is to join the realists.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
a reply to: chr0naut

I think you are trying to find excuses for once more for the vaccine injuries and vaccine deaths by engaging in the usual vaccine apologetics and denialism of the reality of vaccine injuries and deaths by making unfortunate comparisons and pulling out random numbers to suit the narrative you are following.

The current level of serious adverse reactions from the vaccines makes them not safe and effective for use. They should have never been released in the market given their safety and effectiveness was never proven.

They will follow the same path as the Astrazeneca vaccine which was pulled out of the market for safety reasons.

The Oxford–AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine is not an mRNA vaccine. In fact, it is a viral vector vaccine like many older, and more traditional, vaccines. All those who say that mRNA vaccines aren't really vaccines, cannot apply that logic to the AZ vaccine.

Several countries suspended the vaccine not because of safety issues, but because of reduced effectiveness in dealing with new strains and availability issues. There were also some reports of blood clots and although they were very rare, it was thought better to suspend and wait for more effective versions.

Some countries still use the AZ vaccine, especially for people who have already had earlier doses of the vaccine

The country that has created it is no longer using it (UK) and most other countries that have used it have stopped the roll out.

The UK has not suspended the Oxford-AstraZaneca vaccine. However, after a JVCI "CovBoost" study showing it was less effective than boosted mRNA vaccines, they have ceased ordering more of the AZ vaccine.

Because the vaccine can be stored and transported at higher temperatures than mRNA vaccines, it is still a good vaccine for use in countries where storage and transport of super chilled vaccines is problematic.

The Astrazeneca vaccine was suspended and then withdrawn from the country that has created it i.e the UK and then most other countries that were using it stopped the roll out.

It was withdrawn for safety reasons.

You shouldn't engage in vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality and you shouldn't be defending the pharmaceutical companies.

Stop the excuses. The AZ vaccine is nowhere to be found in the UK and most other countries. It has been withdrawn

originally posted by: nickyw
a reply to: Asmodeus3

at this point a deep schism is appearing between the denialists and realists..

it was always going to be thus, as we face a similar situation to that faced by govs at the end of the great war, they could never repatriate the millions of coffins as no society could survive that scale of distress, the coffin trains would be endless.. their answer was the tombs of the unknow warriors/soldiers..

the thing is the death ended with the end of war but it feel as like the worst part of ours has been delayed and there are no slick answers for the denialists to grasp all they have is to join the realists.

The schism is more then obvious.
The vaccine apologists and denialists of reality have nothing left in their arsenal other than more apology and more denialism. And a series of refuted claims.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

that's the issue with reality is no amount of denialism can eradicate it..

as someone fascinated with human behaviour and an amateur people watcher I wonder how long before the bulk of the denialists realise they need to get off the train and join the rest of us in the real world.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

These are excuses for once more.

Where did I get it? There is a whole thread I have created about the mathematics of serious adverse reactions. But I see a pattern here. Whenever actual statistics are involved or actual cases of vaccine injuries and deaths verified by the coroner then these threads are not visited so much by those on the vaccine apology side.

I didn't read you thread, sorry, Oh BTW one you quickly created on the same day we were in this thread as I was asking you. Why didn't you just link your thread when I asked first? Was it even created yet?

You can have a look around.
You should be having a look around as there are many more threads in the same forum: Diseases and Pandemics. Do you think I will link everything??
All you have to do is just look up at the threads.

There are many more threads that I have created.
Many of them are featuring actual cases of people who have died as a result of the vaccines and their deaths have been verified to be vaccine-induced by coroners and/or medical examiners.

Lately one thread about an autopsy which verified the death of a 24 year old who died as a result of the Pfizer vaccine and the the death of a 37 year old mother of two who died as a result of the J&J vaccine.

Of course these threads are not approached much or not at all by the vaccine apologists and denialists of reality.

originally posted by: nickyw
a reply to: Asmodeus3

that's the issue with reality is no amount of denialism can eradicate it..

as someone fascinated with human behaviour and an amateur people watcher I wonder how long before the bulk of the denialists realise they need to get off the train and join the rest of us in the real world.

I agree completely with you. But is worth trying to just let the facts out and hope for the best. It's unbelievable to see the levels of denialism we are seeing. I suppose you have seen my threads already. The denialists don't even approach the ones that talk about verified vaccine induced deaths by the coroners. Reality hits them hard as it seems. I will send you a PM with some relevant information.

originally posted by: Adept18
a reply to: jerryznv

anyone with half a brain that is still defending these vaccines is paid opposition, they may even be part of the family, one things for sure though if they aint family, once they have stopped been useful they will be eradicated, that is certain.

Family is loyal to Family, and this goes all they way back to the 12 tribes of Israel

blue/red wheat/chaff

the harvest is upon us, and this is just a precursor to tribulation

People who are still defending the vaccines are what we call vaccine apologists and denialists of reality.

There are many reasons why someone chooses to defend a crippled vaccine. He/she doesn't have to be paid or having a financial interest. Most people I think are emotionally and ideologically invested in such products as they believe in the good that vaccines can do. When these beliefs are challenged then immediately you get a reaction and often denialism is involved.

Others have not got a clue of what is going on and don't even realise the harms that some vaccines can do to those who use them.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

i think you might recall I had a pf4 clot post 2nd dose and its not just taken me a year to claw my life back to a form of normality, but my reality is that I've yet to come across a single person in the real world not go "was it the vax?" that's the level of acceptance I see in the real world which then triggers the whole I know x/y/z had clots..

so my view is not just that most seem to accept the vax damage but many are reporting who they know where injured and its that combination of acceptance and knowledge outside of medical studies that'll drive societies behaviours going forward

the denialists are now finding themselves at the bottom of a hill that gets steeper as its near impossible to overturn real world acceptance and perception.

originally posted by: nickyw
a reply to: Asmodeus3

i think you might recall I had a pf4 clot post 2nd dose and its not just taken me a year to claw my life back to a form of normality, but my reality is that I've yet to come across a single person in the real world not go "was it the vax?" that's the level of acceptance I see in the real world which then triggers the whole I know x/y/z had clots..

so my view is not just that most seem to accept the vax damage but many are reporting who they know where injured and its that combination of acceptance and knowledge outside of medical studies that'll drive societies behaviours going forward

the denialists are now finding themselves at the bottom of a hill that gets steeper as its near impossible to overturn real world acceptance and perception.

You see, in these threads unless there is a coroner report or a report from a medical examiner everything else is branded as 'doom porn' by the few vaccine apologists and denialists of reality. Of course most people don't share their view and especially here there is a clear majority. Most members do accept there is a strong association between the vax and the various problems that have arisen post vaccination.

In one of my threads I have discussed the case of a woman who died a few minutes after her dose due to 'natural causes' in Canada. A case that has sparked a lot of opposition and resistance from citizens and politicians as the integrity of the Department of Health and the report by the coroner are under serious questions.

It seems that there could be, apart from the confirmed vaccine-induced deaths and injuries, another class of deaths and injuries that the state is unwilling to recognise or in the absence of definite proof calls them deaths by 'natural causes'.


The case is covered in this thread

www.abovetopsecret.com...

'Woman dies 7 minutes after bivalent Covid shot from 'natural causes'


In the case above it is unclear whether there has been an autopsy or any other form of medical examination. And neither an explanation on what are these 'natural causes'

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

You said the majority had no clue about these matters . But you had no clue of how to work 1 serious adverse reaction per 800 vaccinees. In addition you claimed that this number came from some obscure video on Bitchute. Then you may have discovered there are articles which are based on publications.

You seem to just repeat yourself not remembering what I wrote the last 2 or 3 times you asked me this same thing...lol

I asked where is 1 per 800 written, you never told me... I searched for 1 per 800 and found nothing, and asked you after you would not answer me, if it came from a video which is not searchable then...

THE FUNNY PART IS YOU GOT THE 1 per 800 FROM A VIDEO...lol geez That is why you didn't tell me and then snorted some BS about my math because I didn't associate your 1 per 800 with this 12.5 per 10,000 buried deep in a document I didn't read, and you would not link to me to answer my simple question of where did you get the 1 per 800?

Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 10.1 and 15.1 per 10,000 vaccinated over placebo baselines of 17.6 and 42.2 (95 % CI −0.4 to 20.6 and −3.6 to 33.8), respectively. Combined, the mRNA vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated (95 % CI 2.1 to 22.9); risk ratio 1.43 (95 % CI 1.07 to 1.92). The Pfizer trial exhibited a 36 % higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group; risk difference 18.0 per 10,000 vaccinated (95 % CI 1.2 to 34.9); risk ratio 1.36 (95 % CI 1.02 to 1.83). The Moderna trial exhibited a 6 % higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group: risk difference 7.1 per 10,000 (95 % CI –23.2 to 37.4); risk ratio 1.06 (95 % CI 0.84 to 1.33). Combined, there was a 16 % higher risk of serious adverse events in mRNA vaccine recipients: risk difference 13.2 (95 % CI −3.2 to 29.6); risk ratio 1.16 (95 % CI 0.97 to 1.39).

You are a real hoot BTW...

No you are mistaken for once more.
The figure was presented independently by Dr Campbell but if you have seen my thread I got the figure from a peer-reviewed scientific publication which was also linked by Dr Campbell.

It's obvious you don't read any publications and/or scientific articles but you still try to come up with erroneous conclusions based on what you think it's science and research.

By the way, repetition is key for learning and understanding.

You are still in a denial by the way and why don't you read my thread? You will see from where I got the figure. But that's besides the point.

You are still engaging in vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality.

I've linked several of them the former AMA president and former Australian MP with her 1 in 1,000 number, and she also said it's probably a magnitude higher because prior to 2020 every person in that field with experience already knew it's vastly higher than sentinel systems show.

Considering that the majority of Australian adults have now had at least one booster, this suggests that the incidence of serious adverse reactions per vaccinated person could be more than 1-in-1000. PEI admits that under-reporting is a problem, and observers suggest that an order of magnitude of under-reporting is not unreasonable to consider (most estimates put underreporting at much worse than this).”

She's the first one to come forward and tell the truth that all of us in the actual field of public health knew already. Some half-baked unsourced claim that it was changed during COVID to be mandatory has never been substantiated with an actual source and reporting was required since the childhood vaccine act in the 80s, which I also linked to.

Doesn't matter. They will ask for sources, then ignore the sources, then say "what about". Then if you bring in more "what about"s than they've looked at in their brief Google searches we go back to asking for sources, ignoring the sources, then saying "what about" the same thing they started on. No inference, no logic, no comprehensive understanding. Just arguing minutiae that is mostly irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Keep in mind if they aren't getting the boosters they've pretty much accepted that it doesn't provide sufficient benefit, even though they'll argue for months about something that failed their own layman's risk/benefit analysis. It's widely accepted by the "authorities" that the first round is no longer providing any benefit and I've already shown the study indicating it increases risk of future infection incresingly over time. So their failure to get boosted means they don't believe "long COVID" or any of the serious COVID damage they allude to is enough of a concern to have all the "protection" boosters give.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

In the original phase3 trials the rate of a serious adverse reactions for both Pfizer and Moderna was a whopping 98 per 10,000 vaccinees! Very close to 1% and begging the question: did we really know all serious short term effects? The answer is obviously not.

Are the serious adverse reactions any similar to the ones observed in the placebo group?! Obviously not! I think you know where I am going and what I am implying here.

originally posted by: Ksihkehe
a reply to: chr0naut

Additionally, as a test, I have worn an N95 mask for hours straight, and have constant blood-oximeter measurements via my fitness tracker. At no stage have my blood-oxygen readings dropped lower than 90% (the highest alarm value I can set). I suspect my blood-oxygen has not dropped below 95%.

Yeah I bet you did after spending three years promoting mask mandates and social distancing. One based on a few poorly constructed studies, social distancing on virtually nothing at all, after Dr. "The Science" Fauci did a 180 on it with years of evidence that it doesn't work and can indeed cause harm. Conveniently another sycophant tried to misrepresent mask data and claim I was the misinformed one not reading studies, now it's just a cut and paste away. There are doubtless hundreds of quotes I can pull from within the studies that you would ignore, because you know far better than the entire collective efforts of all studies prior to 2019. For some reason you are filled with irrational fear and promote folklore about masks working for general public use, in spite of having taken every "safe and effective" vaccine and booster you constantly promote and defend.

I am not in fear. I have had a full set of the vaccines that you fear, and I have been under lockdown, which was more like an extended holiday for me and many others, and I wear masks and test daily as a requirement of my work. No fear involved and the inconveniences are minor.

We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic

“Evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza…none of the household studies reported a significant reduction in secondary laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the face mask group

“The available clinical evidence of facemask efficacy is of low quality and the best available clinical evidence has mostly failed to show efficacy, with fourteen of sixteen identified randomized controlled trials comparing face masks to no mask controls failing to find statistically significant benefit in the intent-to-treat populations.

“In a Bangladesh study, surgical masks reduced symptomatic COVID infections by between 0 and 22 percent, while the efficacy of cloth masks led to somewhere between an 11 percent increase to a 21 percent decrease. Hence, based on these randomized studies, adult masks appear to have either no or limited efficacy.”

though we support mask wearing by the general public, we continue to conclude that cloth masks and face coverings are likely to have limited impact on lowering COVID-19 transmission

The same pseudoscience fan tried to promote quotes associated with a atudy that continues to confirm you are wrong..

N95 respirators should not be used in a community setting, given the absence of demonstrated benefit, the possible harm with improper use (that is, the requirement for fit testing)

potential risks associated with mask use, including self-contamination (via improper handling of masks), breathing difficulties, and a false sense of security

the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic

You know all those people in North Korea that are so enamoured by their "Great Leader" and their political system? You know how deluded they are?

Surely you realize that the USA, represented by the flag in that silly picture, is actually police state that was set up by J. Edgar Hoover in the 1930's with the founding of the FBI, and has never quite recovered from that?

Just take a look at the incarceration rate in the US, way high, and consider that the US crime rate is about median:

Incarceration Rates by Country 2023

Crime Rate by Country 2023

If crime is about average, why are more people incarcerated, both per capita and in absolute numbers, than ANY other country in the world?

Could it be that all the "freedom and liberty" stuff is nothing but empty platitudes and the American public is just as deluded, or even more so, as those North Koreans?

So an American is the last person I would consider credible on the topic of "freedom", because the objective reality is that they are the least free peeps on Earth.

The fact that the 'flag wavers' are tied so strongly into the anti-vaxx and COVID denialist movements, says something to normal people.

I am not in fear. I have had a full set of the vaccines that you fear,

Were you scared that you would catch something?

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

I am not in fear. I have had a full set of the vaccines that you fear,

Were you scared that you would catch something?

At the time I took my initial COVID vaccines, there were no community cases in New Zealand, but I anticipated that it would eventually spread from other countries.

I also have flu shots and take precautions when driving. It doesn't mean I actively fear those things. Taking simple precautions does not mean I am in a state of fear, but in practice, it is quite the opposite.

Being a denialist, however, does absolutely nothing to reduce risk. I can only assume that such denial must have a strong psychological basis.

Definitely, the word is part of the lingo used frequently by anti-vaxxers, and rarely by those promoting vaccinations.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

I am not in fear. I have had a full set of the vaccines that you fear,

Were you scared that you would catch something?

At the time I took my initial COVID vaccines, there were no community cases in New Zealand, but I anticipated that it would eventually spread from other countries.

I also have flu shots and take precautions when driving. It doesn't mean I actively fear those things. Taking simple precautions does not mean I am in a state of fear, but in practice, it is quite the opposite.

Being a denialist, however, does absolutely nothing to reduce risk. I can only assume that such denial must have a strong psychological basis.

Definitely, the word is part of the lingo used frequently by anti-vaxxers, and rarely by those promoting vaccinations.

Speaking of denialism and vaccine apologetics you seem to be engaging a lot in both of them. You are trying to dismiss vaccine injuries and deaths or downplay the matter and even trivialise it.

Your last paragraph is another set of false arguments as usual.

Safe and effective?? No. I don't think so.

03/05/2021

Denmark said on Monday it would not include the Covid-19 vaccine from US drugmaker Johnson & Johnson in its national vaccination campaign, citing worries over serious side effects involving blood clots.


The Danish Health Authority has concluded that the benefits of using the Covid-19 vaccine from Johnson & Johnson do not outweigh the risk of causing the possible adverse effect... in those who receive the vaccine," the authority said in a statement.

"Therefore, the Danish Health Authority will continue the Danish mass vaccination programme against Covid-19 without the Covid-19 vaccine from Johnson & Johnson," it added.

So the Danish Authorities were honest enough to state the obvious and do the what is necessary: Withdraw the J&J vaccine from the market completely.

The risks outweigh the benefits of vaccinations with that J&J but that should not surprise anyone apart from the vaccine apologists.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

I am not in fear. I have had a full set of the vaccines that you fear,

Were you scared that you would catch something?

At the time I took my initial COVID vaccines, there were no community cases in New Zealand, but I anticipated that it would eventually spread from other countries.

I also have flu shots and take precautions when driving. It doesn't mean I actively fear those things. Taking simple precautions does not mean I am in a state of fear, but in practice, it is quite the opposite.

Being a denialist, however, does absolutely nothing to reduce risk. I can only assume that such denial must have a strong psychological basis.

Definitely, the word is part of the lingo used frequently by anti-vaxxers, and rarely by those promoting vaccinations.

New Zealand, that explained it. You've already been converted to a true believer by the WEF. Vaccines are health and no one cares about diet, exercise or vitamin D.


You act a lot like Hotez who Rogan recently exposed. Funny how unvaccinated Rogan handled covid so well when people were telling him to get vaccinated.

Also, it's not a "vaccine," so people who don't want to be forced to take experimental gene therapy aren't "anti vaxx." It sounds like you are anti freedom and pro Pfizer, pro WEF, pro establishment, pro slavery.


www.reddit.com...

originally posted by: chr0naut

I am comfortable, safe, cared for,

Maybe, but you're also hopeless, so there is that.

Bye bye now, enjoy that safe little cage you've built for yourself in your mind.