(bovine folate receptor alpha protein in DTap/Tdap vaccines)
also covered there:
+ autoimmunity by ca. 2k human proteins found in astra CoV vax. Uff.
We need aptamers on all the "poisonous junk" BigVaxPharMafia pours into these "vaccines", make mass spectrometry on every 100ths vial and do sequencing. And it is a hedgehog-vs-rabbit race. Only if we become the hedgehogs (by mass applicable sensors or distributed surveillance) we can survive.
1. You do *not once* directly addresses the rate at which young males are likely *to die* -- either from either vaccination or COVID -- despite this being your article's principal argument.
2. You use non-matching demographics in your comparison groups.
3. When demographic groups are matched, the data contradicts you.
4. You imply myocarditis is often fatal following vaccination. Available evidence shows the opposite: At least two large scale studies from Israel show a rate of <= 2%.
5. There's some empirical evidence suggests you could be underestimating the incidence of myocarditis following COVID by 50% or more.
The questions raised around risk vs. benefit, especially in 16-17, are critical and valid to debate. And there is absolutely a set of assumptions under which your assertions would be true. However, your argument here does have anything approaching that standard of proof.
A full analysis and discussion with these flaws is here:
Steve and readers, we should start emailing lower level FDA, CDC, etc. employees articles like this. It’s clear that those at the top are oblivious or corrupt.
Get the ball rolling from within by convincing the grunt workers.
Actually this should be obvious to all the doctors working in pediatric/ cardiac critical care. Admissions to our cardiac care unit at the Children’s hospital in my city post vaccine for Myocarditis or pericarditis is 22 kids this year. Zero admissions for this problem with COVID. The spokesman (MD) for the hospital has been reporting all about the mild myocarditis admissions on the local TV station. He was a dear colleague when I worked there now I’m just appalled. He looks like he is in an alternate world. I would think the admission data would be available through the children’s hospital network. To add icing to the cake they fired all the nurses from the hospital who applied for religious exemptions to the vax mandate.
I think you missed one other thing. The rate of myocarditis due to infection applies only to the infected. The rate of myocarditis due to vaccination under a policy of universal vaccination applies to everyone.
Is there any reason to delineate between the different vaxs (J&J, mRNA) and the results? Or, what about the upcoming Novavax which is different altogether? Would Novavax have the same results?
We are getting very close to getting the children jabbed. Most people are absolutely blind to the issues, and they accept the newspaper headlines, and listen to the TV people. How on earth do we convince our friends not to vaxx their kids??
As a data scientist, I have a small suggestion for Calculation #1. To see what is "wrong" in your calculation, hypothetically, think about what would happen if the weekly risk of catching covid and getting myocarditis was really high, say 50/50 per week. What are the implications of your method after two weeks? 100%? After four weeks, is it 200%? No. We can't just multiply the weekly probabilities out.
This is how I would do it:
The weekly p(covid & myo) = (37*.023)/100K = 0.888/100K
To get it after several weeks, you calculate the probability of NOT getting any events and subtract that from 1. That gives you the probability of observing any events at all. So...
p(neither covid nor myo) = 1-0.888/100K = 99.99911% per week.
What we want is the probability of being completely event-free, which we get by multiplying the probability of being event free the first week AND being event free the second week AND so forth. So this is:
p(covid & myo after 24 weeks) = 1 - (99.99911%)^24 = 213.1 cases per million.
This is a small difference from your number, which is why this is a small suggestion, but if you end up presenting your calculations to the FDA or the CDC , we should do so in a way that doesn't raise any eyebrows. I think you'll agree that this method doesn't have any issues with ever producing any probabilities greater than 100%.
+ Autism by
1st certain cow milk casein allergy
2nd desensitization due to intake of milk products "may contain milk"
3rd folic acid receptor clotting by IG4-Antibodies against the cow casein allergy
So use folinic acid, if it resolves symptoms, dig deeper.
Source :
https://vinuarumugham.substack.com/p/cows-milk-protein-contaminated-vaccines
(bovine folate receptor alpha protein in DTap/Tdap vaccines)
also covered there:
+ autoimmunity by ca. 2k human proteins found in astra CoV vax. Uff.
We need aptamers on all the "poisonous junk" BigVaxPharMafia pours into these "vaccines", make mass spectrometry on every 100ths vial and do sequencing. And it is a hedgehog-vs-rabbit race. Only if we become the hedgehogs (by mass applicable sensors or distributed surveillance) we can survive.
How many kids developed myocarditis pre-Covid?? I'd love to know how many were getting it pre Covid compared to after Covid and jab.
There are numerous problems with this article.
1. You do *not once* directly addresses the rate at which young males are likely *to die* -- either from either vaccination or COVID -- despite this being your article's principal argument.
2. You use non-matching demographics in your comparison groups.
3. When demographic groups are matched, the data contradicts you.
4. You imply myocarditis is often fatal following vaccination. Available evidence shows the opposite: At least two large scale studies from Israel show a rate of <= 2%.
5. There's some empirical evidence suggests you could be underestimating the incidence of myocarditis following COVID by 50% or more.
The questions raised around risk vs. benefit, especially in 16-17, are critical and valid to debate. And there is absolutely a set of assumptions under which your assertions would be true. However, your argument here does have anything approaching that standard of proof.
A full analysis and discussion with these flaws is here:
https://pdfhost.io/v/M2MkAVAwL_An_analysis_of_claims_made_by_Steve_Kirsch_in_his_Substack__Dr3
Steve and readers, we should start emailing lower level FDA, CDC, etc. employees articles like this. It’s clear that those at the top are oblivious or corrupt.
Get the ball rolling from within by convincing the grunt workers.
Great summation by Dr. McCullough. Short and sweet. Might want to hyperlink this in your article, Steve. https://twitter.com/msandristbuster/status/1455169495962566660?s=21
Paul Offal
Great work! And don't worry about Twitter, it is a doomed social platform anyway. Just remind about Gab in Twitter more frequently.
Actually this should be obvious to all the doctors working in pediatric/ cardiac critical care. Admissions to our cardiac care unit at the Children’s hospital in my city post vaccine for Myocarditis or pericarditis is 22 kids this year. Zero admissions for this problem with COVID. The spokesman (MD) for the hospital has been reporting all about the mild myocarditis admissions on the local TV station. He was a dear colleague when I worked there now I’m just appalled. He looks like he is in an alternate world. I would think the admission data would be available through the children’s hospital network. To add icing to the cake they fired all the nurses from the hospital who applied for religious exemptions to the vax mandate.
I think you missed one other thing. The rate of myocarditis due to infection applies only to the infected. The rate of myocarditis due to vaccination under a policy of universal vaccination applies to everyone.
Hi Steve,
Would you happen to know the long term survival or mortality rates for pericarditis?
I ask, as there seems to be just as many cases of pericarditis, as there is myocarditis. Though that's more just anecdotal and eye balling data.
Why are you spreading lies?
I suspect it's the most dangerous vaccine of all time.
Is there any reason to delineate between the different vaxs (J&J, mRNA) and the results? Or, what about the upcoming Novavax which is different altogether? Would Novavax have the same results?
Let's play a little analogy game:
kryptonite: superman
dynamite: mountain
iceberg: titanic
???:CDC
What's the answer? (hint: initials are SK)
We are getting very close to getting the children jabbed. Most people are absolutely blind to the issues, and they accept the newspaper headlines, and listen to the TV people. How on earth do we convince our friends not to vaxx their kids??
As a data scientist, I have a small suggestion for Calculation #1. To see what is "wrong" in your calculation, hypothetically, think about what would happen if the weekly risk of catching covid and getting myocarditis was really high, say 50/50 per week. What are the implications of your method after two weeks? 100%? After four weeks, is it 200%? No. We can't just multiply the weekly probabilities out.
This is how I would do it:
The weekly p(covid & myo) = (37*.023)/100K = 0.888/100K
To get it after several weeks, you calculate the probability of NOT getting any events and subtract that from 1. That gives you the probability of observing any events at all. So...
p(neither covid nor myo) = 1-0.888/100K = 99.99911% per week.
What we want is the probability of being completely event-free, which we get by multiplying the probability of being event free the first week AND being event free the second week AND so forth. So this is:
p(covid & myo after 24 weeks) = 1 - (99.99911%)^24 = 213.1 cases per million.
This is a small difference from your number, which is why this is a small suggestion, but if you end up presenting your calculations to the FDA or the CDC , we should do so in a way that doesn't raise any eyebrows. I think you'll agree that this method doesn't have any issues with ever producing any probabilities greater than 100%.