reSee.it

Token #47134

Subscribe To The Free @reSeeIt Newsletter

reSee.it

Token #47134

Subscribe To The Free @reSeeIt Newsletter

reSee.it AI Summary
Since May 2021, I've been labeled a misinformation spreader for expressing concerns about the safety of COVID vaccines. Recent medical peer-reviewed literature supports my claims. Who or what can I trust if not the established scientific literature? Those who refuse to debate and rely on peer-reviewed science should now acknowledge my stance.
Thread Text

@stkirsch - Steve Kirsch

People have said I'm a misinformation spreader because since May 2021, I have been publicly saying the COVID vaccines are not safe. Now the medical peer-reviewed literature shows I was right. Do you believe me now? https://cureus.com/articles/203052-covid-19-mrna-vaccines-lessons-learned-from-the-registrational-trials-and-global-vaccination-campaign#!/…

COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign Our understanding of COVID-19 vaccinations and their impact on health and mortality has evolved substantially since the first vaccine rollouts. Published reports from the original randomized phase 3 trials concluded that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines could greatly reduce COVID-19 symptoms. In the interim, problems with the methods, execution, and reporting of these pivotal trials have emerged. Re-analysis of the Pfizer trial data identified statistically significant increases in serious adverse events (SAEs) in the vaccine group. Numerous SAEs were identified following the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), including death, cancer, cardiac events, and various autoimmune, hematological, reproductive, and neurological disorders. Furthermore, these products never underwent adequate safety and toxicological testing in accordance with previously established scientific standards. Among the other major topics addressed in this narrative review are the published analyses of serious harms to humans, quality control issues and process-related impurities, mechanisms underlying adverse events (AEs), the immunologic basis for vaccine inefficacy, and concerning mortality trends based on the registrational trial data. The risk-benefit imbalance substantiated by the evidence to date contraindicates further booster injections and suggests that, at a minimum, the mRNA injections should be removed from the childhood immunization program until proper safety and toxicological studies are conducted. Federal agency approval of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines on a blanket-coverage population-wide basis had no support from an honest assessment of all relevant registrational data and commensurate consideration of risks versus benefits. Given the extensive, well-documented SAEs and unacceptably high harm-to-reward ratio, we urge governments to endorse a global moratorium on the modified mRNA products until all relevant questions pertaining to causality, residual DNA, and aberrant protein production are answered. cureus.com

@stkirsch - Steve Kirsch

Oh, and if the medical peer-reviewed literature is wrong, then please tell me who or what can I trust? And people who won't debate me and say science is decided in the peer-reviewed literature must now agree with me since the latest literature shows I was right.

Post Media
Details
Token ID reSee.it #47134
𝕏 Link https://x.com/_/status/1752395417973895287
Token URI ipfs://bafybeihm2v3zfanfwxgdxnhmxknkku5qwlugl4wfq237abmyre37cmonpy
Conversation ID 1752395417973895287
Posts In Thread 2
Thread Post IDs
𝕏 Post Created
Author @stkirsch
Author Name Steve Kirsch
Author Profile https://x.com/stkirsch
Chain Polygon
𝕏 Post Saved
First Archiver @CTS_uk0
Contract Address 0xe16ebd042074b7c971d62e544146d141c725f618