7 ms·

Do you take seriously the proposition that more than 100k Americans could die from the vaccine without us noticing? This would easily put it in the top 10 caus

by jlebar 5y ago

Do you take seriously the proposition that more than 100k Americans could die from the vaccine without us noticing? This would easily put it in the top 10 causes of death in America. And presumably this w would be happening worldwide, at an even greater scale. More than 2 billion people have gotten a vaccine worldwide. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. VAERS is self-reported and (as this shows) not reliable data. Honestly I think you're proving the need for this ban on YouTube. You seem to be trying to get it right, but you've been hoodwinked by the misinformation. It is indeed hard to get it right, and this is killing people.

walterbell 5y ago
A successful (somewhere between millionaire and billionaire) entrepreneur has put his credibility on the line with those extremely astonishing claims. He put $1M of his own money into an institution to investigate early treatment for Covid, using existing drugs. Donors to CETF include Marc Benioff, Elon Musk Foundation & Vint Cerf, i.e. reputable tech entrepreneurs, https://www.treatearly.org/donors https://www.treatearly.org/donors. The work of CETF was endorsed by staff at Johns Hopkins, Columbia, UCSF, Yale & others, https://www.treatearly.org/testimonials https://www.treatearly.org/testimonials. He provided a 30 page document referencing the analysis of other doctors, explaining the rationale for those estimates. He has further offered $1,000,000 dollars to anyone who can show that the estimate is off by a factor of 4X, i.e. making the task easier for the person challenging his extraordinary claims. His claims are so far from anyone's expectations that it should be trivial to disprove, right? There's a bug bounty of $1M dollars available to anyone. Why is no one bothering to claim it?
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > His claims are so far from anyone's expectations that it should be trivial to disprove, right? There's a bug bounty of $1M dollars available to anyone. Why is no one bothering to claim it? Because no one who would be interested in disproving it trusts the person offering the bounty to be doing so in good faith.
  - walterbell 5y ago
    For some reason, this makes me think of duels :) Both parties would need to trust the judging entity and he didn't name the individuals in the panel of three. In theory, that panel could be refined until both parties were happy. Funds could be put in escrow.
- rhizome 5y ago
  >A successful (somewhere between millionaire and billionaire) entrepreneur has put his credibility on the line with those extremely astonishing claims. Credibility? You have to be joking, what does he actually have to lose? According to Wikipedia he had a quarter of a billion dollars 15 years ago! He gets to live by rules you and I don't even know are possible, but suffice it to say that credibility is only ever a problem for the little people. Look at trump, after all. Sure, Just like Elon and Zuck he'll couch his ego trips as for the people and pursued at great personal cost, but what actual price is failure to him? I'm guessing his true risk is limited to some teasing in the sauna.
- jlebar 5y ago
  > Why is no one bothering to claim it? I think of that old joke: >>>> The young economist looks down and sees a $20 bill on the street and says, "Hey, look a twenty-dollar bill!" Without even looking, his older and wiser colleague replies, "Nonsense. If there had been a twenty-dollar lying on the street, someone would have already picked it up by now." >>>>> Surely there is not a $1M bill lying on the ground, ripe for the taking. That's why I'm not bothering to claim it.
BoHerfVJrEsq 5y ago
> Honestly I think you're proving the need for this ban on YouTube. You seem to be trying to get it right, but you've been hoodwinked by the misinformation. I think you're proving the need never to censor information. I think you're the one who has been hoodwinked. https://rumble.com/vn3y22-tfnt9-cdc-and-fda-vaccine-committee-members-should-resign-for-failing-to-sp.html https://rumble.com/vn3y22-tfnt9-cdc-and-fda-vaccine-committe... Please jump to around 35:00 where Kirsch compares serious adverse reactions to all vaccines of all kinds from the five years immediately preceding COVID, and the COVID vaccines, and finds, for example, around 3000 times as many reports of pulmonary embolism associated with the COVID vaccines. Kirsch is right. FDA and CDC are both ignoring huge warning signals from VAERS. Huge, obvious signals. They should have seen them, but didn't, and they ignore them even when brought to their attention. This is the kind of information being kicked off of YouTube.
- shadowgovt 5y ago
  The problem with that signal is twofold: 1) self-reporting systems are subject to memetic effects. Like people calling in every suspicious thing they see to the cops if they hear the cops are investigating a high-profile murder, adverse effect reporting increases if people hear a rumor a vaccine may cause problems, whether or not anything in their day-to-day has actually changed. 2) The push to vaccinate everyone means a lot more people are candidates for reporting than in an average year. Given no side-effects from the vaccine, we would still expect VAERS reports to go up significantly. And since heart disease is a leading killer in the US, and unlike most vaccines, this vaccine is being given to the older population almost exclusively relative to the median age of most vaccine recipients, we're hard-pressed to distinguish "vaccine-caused heart disease" from "greater amounts of reporting from older patients resulting in more instances of heart disease showing up in the VAERS reports."
  - BoHerfVJrEsq 5y ago
    1) OK, but is it your suggestion that it's just uneducated people swept up in a craze who are flooding VAERS with valid-looking reports about e.g., pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, intracranial hemorrhage, and aphasia? 2) I think that's valid, we would expect reports to go up. But Kirsch limited his search to ages 20-60, I think to alleviate one of your concerns. We're seeing e.g. 3000x normal, 1900x normal occurrences even when filtering like that. Does that not seem alarming?

by jlebar 5y ago

walterbell 5y ago

A successful (somewhere between millionaire and billionaire) entrepreneur has put his credibility on the line with those extremely astonishing claims. He put $1M of his own money into an institution to investigate early treatment for Covid, using existing drugs. Donors to CETF include Marc Benioff, Elon Musk Foundation & Vint Cerf, i.e. reputable tech entrepreneurs, https://www.treatearly.org/donors https://www.treatearly.org/donors. The work of CETF was endorsed by staff at Johns Hopkins, Columbia, UCSF, Yale & others, https://www.treatearly.org/testimonials https://www.treatearly.org/testimonials. He provided a 30 page document referencing the analysis of other doctors, explaining the rationale for those estimates. He has further offered $1,000,000 dollars to anyone who can show that the estimate is off by a factor of 4X, i.e. making the task easier for the person challenging his extraordinary claims. His claims are so far from anyone's expectations that it should be trivial to disprove, right? There's a bug bounty of $1M dollars available to anyone. Why is no one bothering to claim it?

dragonwriter 5y ago
> His claims are so far from anyone's expectations that it should be trivial to disprove, right? There's a bug bounty of $1M dollars available to anyone. Why is no one bothering to claim it? Because no one who would be interested in disproving it trusts the person offering the bounty to be doing so in good faith.
- walterbell 5y ago
  For some reason, this makes me think of duels :) Both parties would need to trust the judging entity and he didn't name the individuals in the panel of three. In theory, that panel could be refined until both parties were happy. Funds could be put in escrow.
rhizome 5y ago
>A successful (somewhere between millionaire and billionaire) entrepreneur has put his credibility on the line with those extremely astonishing claims. Credibility? You have to be joking, what does he actually have to lose? According to Wikipedia he had a quarter of a billion dollars 15 years ago! He gets to live by rules you and I don't even know are possible, but suffice it to say that credibility is only ever a problem for the little people. Look at trump, after all. Sure, Just like Elon and Zuck he'll couch his ego trips as for the people and pursued at great personal cost, but what actual price is failure to him? I'm guessing his true risk is limited to some teasing in the sauna.
jlebar 5y ago
> Why is no one bothering to claim it? I think of that old joke: >>>> The young economist looks down and sees a $20 bill on the street and says, "Hey, look a twenty-dollar bill!" Without even looking, his older and wiser colleague replies, "Nonsense. If there had been a twenty-dollar lying on the street, someone would have already picked it up by now." >>>>> Surely there is not a $1M bill lying on the ground, ripe for the taking. That's why I'm not bothering to claim it.

BoHerfVJrEsq 5y ago

> Honestly I think you're proving the need for this ban on YouTube. You seem to be trying to get it right, but you've been hoodwinked by the misinformation. I think you're proving the need never to censor information. I think you're the one who has been hoodwinked. https://rumble.com/vn3y22-tfnt9-cdc-and-fda-vaccine-committee-members-should-resign-for-failing-to-sp.html https://rumble.com/vn3y22-tfnt9-cdc-and-fda-vaccine-committe... Please jump to around 35:00 where Kirsch compares serious adverse reactions to all vaccines of all kinds from the five years immediately preceding COVID, and the COVID vaccines, and finds, for example, around 3000 times as many reports of pulmonary embolism associated with the COVID vaccines. Kirsch is right. FDA and CDC are both ignoring huge warning signals from VAERS. Huge, obvious signals. They should have seen them, but didn't, and they ignore them even when brought to their attention. This is the kind of information being kicked off of YouTube.

shadowgovt 5y ago
The problem with that signal is twofold: 1) self-reporting systems are subject to memetic effects. Like people calling in every suspicious thing they see to the cops if they hear the cops are investigating a high-profile murder, adverse effect reporting increases if people hear a rumor a vaccine may cause problems, whether or not anything in their day-to-day has actually changed. 2) The push to vaccinate everyone means a lot more people are candidates for reporting than in an average year. Given no side-effects from the vaccine, we would still expect VAERS reports to go up significantly. And since heart disease is a leading killer in the US, and unlike most vaccines, this vaccine is being given to the older population almost exclusively relative to the median age of most vaccine recipients, we're hard-pressed to distinguish "vaccine-caused heart disease" from "greater amounts of reporting from older patients resulting in more instances of heart disease showing up in the VAERS reports."
- BoHerfVJrEsq 5y ago
  1) OK, but is it your suggestion that it's just uneducated people swept up in a craze who are flooding VAERS with valid-looking reports about e.g., pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, intracranial hemorrhage, and aphasia? 2) I think that's valid, we would expect reports to go up. But Kirsch limited his search to ages 20-60, I think to alleviate one of your concerns. We're seeing e.g. 3000x normal, 1900x normal occurrences even when filtering like that. Does that not seem alarming?