🧵
What is the probability that .@sarahjestock - who is the Program Director of @WellcomeLeap - should be randomly the corresponding author on a paper that she didn't write, relating to datasets that can't be audited, showing "no pregnancy problems with mRNA vaccines"?
And what is the probability that @sarahjestock has written 50 papers in 2 years whilst being a full time obstetrician, university professor at two universities, program director at @WellcomeLeap...
And in her papers declares no conflicts of interest...
It's hit and miss, you see. When it's a pregnancy in vaccine paper there are no conflicts of interest. When it's another paper, we'll declare them but they aren't really conflicts because they are just Pharma so that's fine
And can you believe it? Sarah Stock - whose name is on over 100 papers - just happened to team up with Colin Simpson in 2020!
What a coincidence!
And these are the two players behind the Scottish COVID vaccine in pregnancy data
The HDRUK Impact of the Year award 2021?
Really?
They kept that quiet.
So you went from teacher's pet at Nicole Junkermann's and Matt Hancock's HDRUK...
Which is infamous for its links to Jeffrey Epstein via Nicole Junkermann
To be in charge of New Zealand's Electronic Health Data.
Oh good. I'm sure New Zealanders can now sleep easy knowing that their health data is getting the "HDRUK" treatment and being pawned off to Pharma to create synthetic data sets to sell more drugs that don't work? #EMRgate
And it's so pleasing to see such collaboration and obviously with all your awards it's understandable that you don't remember to declare your conflicts of interest.
So let me ask you both this important question:
Did first author Clara Calvert analyse the 500,000+ patient data sets for those Nature papers, verify them and write the papers - or were they ghost written for her?
I'm going to explain why this chart is so important and why @jsm2334 is being disingenuous by ignoring it - whilst making points that undermine the "real world vaccine data" industry.
It's a Kaplan-Meier curve and it obliterates Jeffrey's argument.
Just to go over it... the lines show what proportion of subjects (children) ended up without chronic disease up to 10 years after being studied.
It's called a survival analysis because it's used for cancer survival.
If the red line was a cancer drug it would be a blockbuster
It shows that by the end of the 10 year follow-up, of those that they could still follow up (who stayed in the study) 57% (100-43%) of vaccinated kids had chronic disease (e.g. asthma) and 17% (100-83%) of unvaccinated kids did.
Janet Diaz was the person that led the #MAGICApp guideline committees that stopped your grandma getting antibiotics for her post-viral pneumonia, leading to her death.
But she did this with the help of @pervandvik who deleted his account
Diaz here tells you that COVID kills you by an overreacting immune response, but that was never true.
She was an intensivist recruited by the WHO in 2018.
None of this was true, but it sold a LOT of drugs and killed a LOT of people
Which US govt organisation blew a hole in the ozone layer in 1958 by sending atomic bombs to the troposphere over the Antarctic in operation Argus - then blaming the resulting destruction of ozone on CFC's?
It wasn't just Pfizer that hid the fact that the mRNA-LNP complex went to the ovaries (where it could not possibly provide its declared function in the lung).
The AMH drop (ovarian reserve) after vaccination was later shown by the Manniche paper after being denied by the Kate Clancy and Viki Males of the world.
But this time the Arnold foundation's @RetractionWatch have not only revealed with their "exclusive" that they were directly involved in trying to get this important paper retracted...
🧵If you have decided after 48 hours that "The Israelis did it" you have not only fallen for the deep state's playbook again... but you probably think that Ashley Babbitt was killed by a movie gunshot to the shoulder.
Stop falling for the narratives.
[credit: @wooz_news ]
For the record the official cause of death was listed as "gunshot wound to the left anterior shoulder". This is not possible as the cause of death of the woman in the video as portrayed.
Instantaneous death as portrayed in the Babbitt video cannot happen with a gunshot to the shoulder as it does not involve the spinal cord or brain.
There are also no major vessels to bleed out (which would take a while) other than the subclavian. If that bled out enough to cause mortality there would be a bloodbath.
The Wooz news video confirms the lack of bleeding.