From a huge study in Denmark over 3 flu seasons, in which there was a reasonable match of vaccine to circulating strains. A friend just sent me these 3 months old articles
A pointless study , no mention of vitamin D levels , the Dane’s are known for having high levels of oily fish in their diet.This seems to have been done to support a pharmaceutical intervention that only profits the men in white coats.
If covid didn't teach you that they lie lie lie nothing will. I do not take anything covid shot did enough damage why keep going back. I was against 75% of shots prior to covid now I feel even more so. Look what it is doing to our children by the time they are age 5 they have been given more crap than an experimental monkey. That says a lot.
I seem to recall, maybe a decade ago or so, seeing on the FDA's own website that the flu shots weren't as effective on the older populations. And since they already weren't very effective in the younger groups, no better than 50% effective, I realized it made no sense to get the flu shot. Besides, even many people getting the shot still got the flu.
I remember when I first encountered the high dose flu vaccine. My doctor had recommended that I get the flu vax, and when I went to the pharmacy, they looked at my age and said they would give me the higher dose one. I requested the normal dose vax, but the pharmacist refused to give me that option. I walked out without getting the flu vax and have not had any vaccination of any sort since.
Why? I can only say that I felt at the time that taking a stronger dose of a vaccine because the regular dose was, apparently, ineffective now that I was older, did not seem like a good idea. I was not anti-vaccine at that time, but the rationale did not seem right to me. This was well before Covid of course. Since then, I (and almost all of us here I suspect) have learned a great deal about what is actually going on with vaccines. I am grateful that I grew up in a time before the childhood vaccine schedule became insane.
Personally, I have always had difficulty with clinical trials. Well-conducted trials must always be carried out in relation to the effectiveness of a new product. Part of the participating group is given the new drug and the other part is given a placebo, but if the group receiving the drug experiences serious side effects, the researchers can draw their conclusions from that, but if you belong to this group, you're screwed. If you die as a result of this trial, you're just out of luck? Yes, but in this case, they were already very elderly people. They were going to die soon anyway. Does the end justify the means? There are more where that came from? It is for the benefit of the collective? Is an ethical view of this way of acting an obstruction within the course of events in this flourishing industry? If you want to make an omelette, you have to break some eggs? It rather testifies to an extremely materialistic view of human beings. Do all trial participants receive money for their participation? And in the case of those who accidentally die, does that money go to their next of kin? Even if they were elderly people. If they had not participated in such a trial, they might have been able to live a little longer.
In order to gain a good understanding of all the effects of a new product, the trial must involve as large a group of participants as possible. As a result, many more people may die or suffer serious side effects that they would not have experienced if they had not participated. From an ethical point of view, this remains highly controversial.
look at it this way. Never be disappointed when you don't appeal to the non-thinkers. Society abounds with those who. have no sense of smell though the rat be dangled inches from their nostrils.
Jesus, the very essence of goodness, was crucified for stating the facts to an unbelieving group of His own........
Jomico got it right. I think the goal is to re-establish the traditional flu shot as valid. The issue I see is that the study was done in a population whose diet is high in 3-Omega as well as Vitamin D, so the study results would appear positive. The real answer is to take a population study, with half not taking the flu shot, and other half does. In both populations you measure the blood value of D on Oct 1 and again on March 1 of the next year. The result will show that those who maintained a high level of D DID NOT acquire the flu or dispatched quickly. In 2007 I was mandated to get the flu shot and I acquired the active form. Last time I got the flu shot and have not had the flu since. Antibodies work! Two Aspirin, Two Vitamin C and Two NAC dispatched it in 6 hours in 2007. Also my Vitamin D level was about 50 ng's. They will never do the study, because it would deep six the concept of having 160 million Americans be injected yearly!
I am blessed to know how the human body works...and the last thing anyone should do in order to be healthy is inject toxic matter into the bloodstream...Poison damages and kills!
All vaccines serve one purpose: population reduction.
Profitable population reduction.
Just like war, big food, toxic housing, toxic textiles etc.
A pointless study , no mention of vitamin D levels , the Dane’s are known for having high levels of oily fish in their diet.This seems to have been done to support a pharmaceutical intervention that only profits the men in white coats.
Roll up!! Roll up!!
Get the flu shot while it's hot, cause nothing screams protecting peeps more than being injected with:
💉 Formaldehyde - A fresh chemical kick to start the day!!
💥 Thimerosal - A little mercury to keep things shiny!!
🪠Aborted Fetal Cell Lines - A dash of history to add some flavor!!
🍬 Polysorbate 80 - Sweeten the deal with a stabilizer!!
🎠Gelatin - Bounce back with some chewy goodness!!
🤸Antibiotics - Big Harma’s finest!!
Get em’ while they're hot - because nothing says ’safe and effective’ like a cocktail of toxins!! 🎉
"Roll up, roll up for the Magical Mystery Tour; Step right this way!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge214KAOnLY
If covid didn't teach you that they lie lie lie nothing will. I do not take anything covid shot did enough damage why keep going back. I was against 75% of shots prior to covid now I feel even more so. Look what it is doing to our children by the time they are age 5 they have been given more crap than an experimental monkey. That says a lot.
I seem to recall, maybe a decade ago or so, seeing on the FDA's own website that the flu shots weren't as effective on the older populations. And since they already weren't very effective in the younger groups, no better than 50% effective, I realized it made no sense to get the flu shot. Besides, even many people getting the shot still got the flu.
I remember when I first encountered the high dose flu vaccine. My doctor had recommended that I get the flu vax, and when I went to the pharmacy, they looked at my age and said they would give me the higher dose one. I requested the normal dose vax, but the pharmacist refused to give me that option. I walked out without getting the flu vax and have not had any vaccination of any sort since.
Why? I can only say that I felt at the time that taking a stronger dose of a vaccine because the regular dose was, apparently, ineffective now that I was older, did not seem like a good idea. I was not anti-vaccine at that time, but the rationale did not seem right to me. This was well before Covid of course. Since then, I (and almost all of us here I suspect) have learned a great deal about what is actually going on with vaccines. I am grateful that I grew up in a time before the childhood vaccine schedule became insane.
So they figured out what CBS reported on back in '06:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQclKC7-Ar0
That not only does the flu shot cause the flu in some people in other cases the flu shot kills them.
Personally, I have always had difficulty with clinical trials. Well-conducted trials must always be carried out in relation to the effectiveness of a new product. Part of the participating group is given the new drug and the other part is given a placebo, but if the group receiving the drug experiences serious side effects, the researchers can draw their conclusions from that, but if you belong to this group, you're screwed. If you die as a result of this trial, you're just out of luck? Yes, but in this case, they were already very elderly people. They were going to die soon anyway. Does the end justify the means? There are more where that came from? It is for the benefit of the collective? Is an ethical view of this way of acting an obstruction within the course of events in this flourishing industry? If you want to make an omelette, you have to break some eggs? It rather testifies to an extremely materialistic view of human beings. Do all trial participants receive money for their participation? And in the case of those who accidentally die, does that money go to their next of kin? Even if they were elderly people. If they had not participated in such a trial, they might have been able to live a little longer.
In order to gain a good understanding of all the effects of a new product, the trial must involve as large a group of participants as possible. As a result, many more people may die or suffer serious side effects that they would not have experienced if they had not participated. From an ethical point of view, this remains highly controversial.
Why didn't they include an unvaccinated cohort? I've never had a flu vaccine, and don't ever intend to get one. I try to avoid blatantly bad medicine.
Control money and depopulation.
Doc,
look at it this way. Never be disappointed when you don't appeal to the non-thinkers. Society abounds with those who. have no sense of smell though the rat be dangled inches from their nostrils.
Jesus, the very essence of goodness, was crucified for stating the facts to an unbelieving group of His own........
Jomico got it right. I think the goal is to re-establish the traditional flu shot as valid. The issue I see is that the study was done in a population whose diet is high in 3-Omega as well as Vitamin D, so the study results would appear positive. The real answer is to take a population study, with half not taking the flu shot, and other half does. In both populations you measure the blood value of D on Oct 1 and again on March 1 of the next year. The result will show that those who maintained a high level of D DID NOT acquire the flu or dispatched quickly. In 2007 I was mandated to get the flu shot and I acquired the active form. Last time I got the flu shot and have not had the flu since. Antibodies work! Two Aspirin, Two Vitamin C and Two NAC dispatched it in 6 hours in 2007. Also my Vitamin D level was about 50 ng's. They will never do the study, because it would deep six the concept of having 160 million Americans be injected yearly!
PS: Learn more here: https://thomasabraunrph.substack.com/p/vitamin-d-for-health-defense
I am blessed to know how the human body works...and the last thing anyone should do in order to be healthy is inject toxic matter into the bloodstream...Poison damages and kills!
High doses of poisons do tend to harm a person. Vaccines are no exceptions.
US and UK Vitamin D misinformation:
https://youtu.be/AtoxkK7MeKc?si=lB7DQzhe0NcoJ0nT
Very correct.