Here's the CDC's own study on that for anyone interested
Pediatric Infection-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence Estimation Using Commercial Laboratory Specimens: How Representative Is It of the General U.S. Pediatric Population? papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
@nirav_mainecdc next move is to attempt to portray a blatantly false reality that healthy kids get serious covid disease at non-negligible rates
We know that the CDC’s #’s dramatically overexaggerate the true covid morbidity/mortality especially in pediatric population
Very very very dramatically
Which is how they excrete slides like the ACIP absurdities
Kushner et al found that 45% of pediatric hospitalizations were “unlikely to be caused by covid”; and that 67.5% were either asymptomatic (39.3%) or mild to moderate disease (28.2%)
ie were not sick enough to warrant hosp cuz of disease
Webb et al found that only 14% of hospitalized patients under 22yo were “significantly symptomatic”, while 40% were “incidental infections” and 47% were “potentially symptomatic”
They even concluded “Most hospitalized patients who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 are asymptomatic or have a reason for hospitalization other than coronavirus disease 2019”
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Don't believe the baloney ACIP wants you to mindlessly accept
Scientific method, not Scientism
Wu et al found that >51% of children infected with covid were co-infected with another respiratory pathogen
In other words, even kids with respiratory symptoms, many were probably NOT because of covid but bec of e.g. RSV (a far bigger threat to children)
Sorg et al found literally ZERO deaths in kids 5-11 – “In this group, the ICU admit rate was 0.2 per 10,000 and ***case fatality could not be calculated, due to an absence of cases.***"
And let's not forget, the CDC itself at the start of the pandemic admitted “For children (0-17 years), COVID-19 hospitalization rates are much lower than influenza hospitalization rates during recent influenza seasons.” cdc.gov/coronavirus/20…
For the record, there is no compelling evidence that even unhealthy kids have meaningful risk from covid
"Immunocompromised children and young people are at no increased risk of severe COVID-19"
and these flaws would be criticized if committed by a 9th grader, let alone credentialed scientists whose work is being used to formulate vaccine recommendations/policy for hundreds of millions of children
“Seropositive children, all with a history of pauci-symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, did not report long COVID more frequently than seronegative children”
2 did not find persistent symptoms to be more prevalent in children and adolescents with evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This highlights that long-term SARS-CoV-2 infection–associated symptoms are difficult to distinguish from pandemic-associated symptoms."
No kidding Sherlock
But MIS-C!!!!!!
CDC still can't definitively say if there's a link between covid & MIS-C
But there actually is an alternate plausible etiological possibility for MIS-C....
Dorabawila et al found vaccine efficacy against infection for Pfizer in kids 5-11 plummeted to 12% by 28-34 days after the 2nd dose, and to 48% for hospitalization.
Moderna’s trial found, according to their own press release, “vaccine efficacy in children 6 months to 2 years was 43.7% and vaccine efficacy was 37.5% in the 2 to under 6 years age group.”
BELOW the 50% threshold for EUA per the FDA’s own standards
If you can't even trust Moderna's own press release, who can you trust exactly???
I know - Pfizer!!
Oh wait, not Pfizer either:
Pfizer’s initial trial failed to show any benefit (Pfizer and BioNTech Provide Update on Ongoing Studies of COVID-19 Vaccine pfizer.com/news/press-rel…
Yeah, SCIENCE these days is primarily disseminated via press release
To be fair, it's not like they're less accurate or corrupt than the top-echelon medical journals
"all age groups are at risk for the theoretical problem of an “original antigenic sin” — a decreased ability to respond to a new immunogen because the immune system has locked onto the original immunogen"
1) "Indeed, anti-maskers often reveal themselves to be more sophisticated in their understanding of how scientific knowledge is socially constructed than their ideological adversaries, who espouse naïve realism about the “objective” truth of public health data."
Partial list of studies documenting spike protein toxicities:
Mitochondrial Dynamics in SARS-COV2 Spike Protein Treated Human Microglia: Implications for Neuro-COVID - PMC ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
SARS-CoV-2 spike protein removes lipids from model membranes and interferes with the capacity of high density lipoprotein to exchange lipids ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
It is instructive to see how 'experts' lack expertise, are generally illiterate; also dishonest & manipulative; and are unable to engage on substance
So here is a thread to review @MarcusBlimi tweets from last night, which is a pretty good all-around example of this
🧵🧵
For Background purposes -
Some of the ways people manipulate/gaslight/etc.
Will refer to these by #:
1) misrepresent content 2) claim you said something you didn't 3) straw-man argument 4) ignore/pretend never said something after it has been refuted
5) refusal to address legitimate contra-arguments 6) use of general platitudes in lieu of specific granular evidence/arguments 7) Mockery in order to hide the lack of an actual argument 8) Claim something without any basis or citing any evidence to contest something
Published: Catecholamines are the main trigger of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis: a hypothesis demonstrated by epidemiological, anatomopathological, molecular and physiological findings.
I have just published the peer-reviewed scientific article and to be indexed in PubMed, peer-reviewed, where I propose the likely reason why mRNA COVID-19 vaccines can cause myocarditis and sudden deaths in specific populations.
This is not a way of discouraging vaccination, but of detecting a phenomenon. As an author, I am biased in saying whether this should lead to a rethink about the COVID-19 vaccine for the populations of the article. 3/3
@MarcusBlimi According to @MarcusBlimi, vaccine injuries that are heavily documented in case reports are 'ludicrous'
This isn't just extremist radical stupidity, but also morally decrepit
The pro-covid vaccine cult has limitless tolerance for human suffering caused by their precious jab
@MarcusBlimi And then she wonders why there is a growing substantial portion of society that presumes the medical establishment to be liars and scientifically inept
to say the least
@MarcusBlimi Which reminds me, I should probably respond to this gem from @MarcusBlimi that is not just scientifically illiterate, but lacking elementary common sense that you'd expect of a 10-yo