Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #gtcentry
Most recents (14)
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Unsupported claim:
[02:21:25] And then the other place that we have a signal, which I think suggests something we need to worry farther down the road. You tell me, Robert, if I'm on the right track here or not. But the fact that it shows up concentrating
[02:21:25] And then the other place that we have a signal, which I think suggests something we need to worry farther down the road. You tell me, Robert, if I'm on the right track here or not. But the fact that it shows up concentrating
in bone marrow.
[02:21:39] Steve: Bad news.
[02:21:40] Bret: Actually that suggests that you could end up with-- And I'm not saying this is gonna happen, but I'm saying we need to look for something like leukemias showing up here, because of their creation in the bone marrow."
[02:21:39] Steve: Bad news.
[02:21:40] Bret: Actually that suggests that you could end up with-- And I'm not saying this is gonna happen, but I'm saying we need to look for something like leukemias showing up here, because of their creation in the bone marrow."
As I outlined in detail in another submission, mRNA vaccines carry no oncorisk:
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Unsupported claim:
[02:21:40] Bret: I know from other work, that it also seems to show up preferentially in-in, uh, lymph nodes, which raises the question of whether or not, uh, lymphomas might be created.
[02:21:40] Bret: I know from other work, that it also seems to show up preferentially in-in, uh, lymph nodes, which raises the question of whether or not, uh, lymphomas might be created.
Lymphomas are a group of blood cancers caused by an oncotransformation of lymphocytes, a subclass of immune system cells which includes T- and B-cells.
For cells to turn cancerous, driver mutations are necessary. Such mutations are usually endogenous
For cells to turn cancerous, driver mutations are necessary. Such mutations are usually endogenous
but could also be caused by external factors: radiation or chronic exposure to external carcinogens, e.g. asbestos or cigarette smoke.
Mutations must happen in the DNA of such cells, which is located in the nucleus.
Mutations must happen in the DNA of such cells, which is located in the nucleus.
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Falsification:
[00:39:34] Heather: the authors of the Quillette article don't seem to know what prophylaxis means.
...
[00:40:48] Bret: Yeah, so they absolutely screw up. And somehow it got through the editing process.
[00:39:34] Heather: the authors of the Quillette article don't seem to know what prophylaxis means.
...
[00:40:48] Bret: Yeah, so they absolutely screw up. And somehow it got through the editing process.
"They screw up that, that fundamental distinction.
...
the issue that we are going to argue is absolutely central that they have completely botched and having botched it, when you see how the logic correctly works, you'll understand why their entire argument must be wrong"
...
the issue that we are going to argue is absolutely central that they have completely botched and having botched it, when you see how the logic correctly works, you'll understand why their entire argument must be wrong"
This is a resubmission of a clearly false claim that was not assessed by all of the refs on its merits.
This claim by B&H is important as they open with it their critique of our arguments in their podcast and use it to erroneously undermine our credibility (see attached).
This claim by B&H is important as they open with it their critique of our arguments in their podcast and use it to erroneously undermine our credibility (see attached).
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Unsupported claim:
[01:02:16] Steve: Which means 5,000 reports translates into 500,000 deaths. And I don’t think it’s that high. Okay?
[01:02:31] Steve: Right. It’s not that high, but-but it’s higher. It’s-- I guarantee you it’s higher.
[01:02:16] Steve: Which means 5,000 reports translates into 500,000 deaths. And I don’t think it’s that high. Okay?
[01:02:31] Steve: Right. It’s not that high, but-but it’s higher. It’s-- I guarantee you it’s higher.
Even the 5000 VAERS reports of potential deaths at the time of the podcast were yet unconfirmed to be caused by vaccines.
And the 1% estimate for underreported events cannot be extrapolated to underreported deaths, as that estimate comes from a 2011 report based on ALL possible adverse events after vaccinations, the overwhelming majority of which are benign:
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Falsification:
[00:39:34] Heather: the authors of the Quillette article don't seem to know what prophylaxis means. Uh, may I- may I?
[00:39:49] Bret: Yeah, please.
[00:39:34] Heather: the authors of the Quillette article don't seem to know what prophylaxis means. Uh, may I- may I?
[00:39:49] Bret: Yeah, please.
[00:39:49] Heather: Yes. So somewhere in its lower down in the- in the written part of-- So here we go. This is just a para-- just one paragraph from their-- the Quillette piece:
[start quote from Quillette article]
"How does the evidence for the prophylactic efficacy of ivermectin stack up against the vaccines? It's not even close. Remember, we don't yet know that the drug provides any significant benefit.
"How does the evidence for the prophylactic efficacy of ivermectin stack up against the vaccines? It's not even close. Remember, we don't yet know that the drug provides any significant benefit.
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Unsupported claim:
[00:13:22] But the spike protein itself, we now know is very dangerous and cytotoxic.
[00:13:22] But the spike protein itself, we now know is very dangerous and cytotoxic.
No, there is no evidence that the spike protein alone is "very dangerous and cytotoxic" in concentrations even orders of magnitude higher than what is ever observed in vaccinated people.
The claim about the dangers of the "lone" (i.e. free-floating) spike protein stems from an incorrect reading the @manorlaboratory Salk study:
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Unsupported claim:
[00:17:30] the fact that the drug in question, Ivermectin, comes from, uh, soil bacteria, it's not a completely synthetic molecule, means that that it is likely to be similar to the things that one's ancestors have encountered before,
[00:17:30] the fact that the drug in question, Ivermectin, comes from, uh, soil bacteria, it's not a completely synthetic molecule, means that that it is likely to be similar to the things that one's ancestors have encountered before,
and there's, therefore, a good chance that the body has a reasonably elegant way of dealing with it rather than uh, using some mechanism that's-that's not so great."
There is no evidence that a molecule extracted from soil bacteria has any safety of efficacy advantage. There are plenty of counterexamples of toxic molecules found in soil bacteria:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthrax
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthrax
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Unsupported claim:
[00:11:10] "what I believe is a flaw in the drug safety system. I published this flaw. And, uh, the flaw basically amounts to the mice that are often used for things like drug safety testing and other experiments having been
[00:11:10] "what I believe is a flaw in the drug safety system. I published this flaw. And, uh, the flaw basically amounts to the mice that are often used for things like drug safety testing and other experiments having been
"accidentally evolutionarily modified by the breeding protocol that is used to produce them so that their telomeres which are these, um, repetitive sequences at the ends of chromosomes have been elongated tremendously and has, uh, has potentially very large impacts.
"Effectively, these animals have a capacity to repair their tissues so that if you poison them, but you don't outright kill them, they actually have an extremely good capacity to fix themselves whereas we have a limited capacity, so they're-they're bad models.
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Falsification:
[00:12:21]"Normally, when you vaccinate someone, the vaccine goes in the shoulder, and it stays in the shoulder, in-in the shoulder area."
[00:12:21]"Normally, when you vaccinate someone, the vaccine goes in the shoulder, and it stays in the shoulder, in-in the shoulder area."
This is false. Normally, the vaccine DOES NOT stay in the shoulder area but is distributed to various tissues.
Here is a representative i.m. biodistribution study:
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27498239/
Here is a representative i.m. biodistribution study:
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27498239/
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Falsification:
[01:17:01] Heather: And when you actually read the paper, you find that there are tiny effects, maybe, but it's in combination with this other drug, Verapamil, in which fertility meiotic effects become an issue. So that's cheating.
[01:17:01] Heather: And when you actually read the paper, you find that there are tiny effects, maybe, but it's in combination with this other drug, Verapamil, in which fertility meiotic effects become an issue. So that's cheating.
No, IVM alone produces measurable negative effects on reproductive morphology and behavior -- see attached table.
Study in question:
sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
Study in question:
sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
Moreover, other studies have also found evidence of ivermectin's testicular toxicity:
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.111…
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.111…
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Unsupported claim:
[00:11:10] what I believe is a flaw in the drug safety system. I published this flaw. And, uh, the flaw basically amounts to the mice that are often used for things like drug safety testing and other experiments having been
[00:11:10] what I believe is a flaw in the drug safety system. I published this flaw. And, uh, the flaw basically amounts to the mice that are often used for things like drug safety testing and other experiments having been
accidentally evolutionarily modified by the breeding protocol that is used to produce them so that their telomeres which are these, um, repetitive sequences at the ends of chromosomes have been elongated tremendously and has, uh, has potentially very large impacts.
Effectively, these animals have a capacity to repair their tissues so that if you poison them, but you don't outright kill them, they actually have an extremely good capacity to fix themselves whereas we have a limited capacity, so they're-they're bad models.
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Falsification:
[00:23:16] Bret: We did not know that it had skipped the animal trials that might have alerted us to something really dangerous
[00:23:50] Steve: Yeah, they didn't even- they didn't even test the vaccine in itself in the animal trials.
[00:23:16] Bret: We did not know that it had skipped the animal trials that might have alerted us to something really dangerous
[00:23:50] Steve: Yeah, they didn't even- they didn't even test the vaccine in itself in the animal trials.
No, the vaccines did not skip the animal trials.
Animal studies:
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Falsification:
[00:12:21]"Normally, when you vaccinate someone, the vaccine goes in the shoulder, and it stays in the shoulder, in-in the shoulder area." And what he discovered is that it doesn't stay in the shoulder, where we all thought it should stay
[00:12:21]"Normally, when you vaccinate someone, the vaccine goes in the shoulder, and it stays in the shoulder, in-in the shoulder area." And what he discovered is that it doesn't stay in the shoulder, where we all thought it should stay
It is completely expected that a vaccine injected intramuscularly will enter the bloodstream and the lymphatic system and will thus be transported to various tissues.
@BetterSkeptics #gtcentry Falsification:
[00:13:22] But the spike protein itself, we now know is very dangerous and cytotoxic.
[00:13:22] But the spike protein itself, we now know is very dangerous and cytotoxic.
No, there is no evidence that the spike protein alone is "very dangerous and cytotoxic" in concentrations even orders of magnitude higher than what is ever observed in vaccinated people. Moreover, successful clinical trials of vaccines prove that the vaccines are extremely safe.
