Kevin Bass PhD MS Profile picture
Oct 3, 2023 2 tweets 2 min read Read on X
In a 2018 paper, Nobel Prize Winner Drew Weissman warned about the potential risks of mRNA vaccines, including the development of autoimmunity and "blood coagulation and pathological thrombus formation".
Both the Pfizer and Moderna randomized controlled trials showed signals of coagulation disorders--blood clots--resulting from the COVID-19 vaccine.
Why are we not talking about these potential risks of mRNA vaccines more?


Image
Image
Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Kevin Bass PhD MS

Kevin Bass PhD MS Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @kevinnbass

Dec 15
The @nytimes's @fstonenyc has responded to our letter of the editor about @zeynep's recent op-ed about @DrJBhattacharya's NIH Director nomination.

Let's break it down.

Word for word.

A🧵. Instructing @zeynep and @fstonenyc how to read basic sentences in the English language.

@MartinKulldorff @Bryce_Nickels @anish_kokaImage
@fstonenyc opens his response by claiming that, in fact:

"The March 24, 2020 essay in the Wall Street Journal, co-written by Dr. Bhattacharya, never describes 2 million as the high range of potential death estimates." Image
Oh really?

Let's take a look at the article, then, shall we?

Bhattacharya:

"The degree of bias is uncertain because available data are limited. But it could make the difference between an epidemic that kills 20,000 and one that kills two million." Image
Read 24 tweets
Nov 27
"Journalist" @zeynep is at it again.

This time, she is twisting @DrJBhattacharya's words in a malignant op-ed published in the @nytimes.

Let's break this article down word by word.

Thread.🧵
She starts by claiming:

"In the early days of the pandemic, Bhattacharya repeatedly predicted that the virus would likely kill about 20,000 to 40,000 Americans. (The death toll turned out to be about 1.2 million.)"

She provides three references.

I will parse them one-by-one.

(Link to Zeynep article btw: )archive.ph/xQH7W#selectio…Image
Yet these three links in which Jay "repeatedly" says such a thing consist of the following:

1. Original WSJ article of note
2. Stanford press release about the WSJ article
3. NYTimes article misrepresenting Jay's WSJ article

See screenshots Image
Image
Image
Read 28 tweets
Oct 29
In May 2021, Fauci claimed on MSNBC that the COVID-19 vaccine stopped transmission:

"When the virus gets to you, you stop it."

Yet data at the time showed antibody levels were rapidly falling. His story would soon unravel.

Fauci knew this. Why did he hide the truth?
The story of rapidly falling antibodies is a fascinating one.

This NEJM study from December 3, 2020, published by scientists at Fauci's own NIAID, claims that antibody levels are "durable".

Yet it presented these levels on a logarithmic scale.

nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NE…
Just months later, researchers re-analyzed these exact same data, found a 65-day half-life, and came to the exact opposite conclusion, publishing it in Nature Medicine.

nature.com/articles/s4159…
Read 18 tweets
Oct 20
In his latest Kamala campaign speech, Obama implies that if Trump followed his pandemic playbook, implementing stricter measures, deaths would have been the same as Canada, with 400,000 fewer.

Obama is lying to score political points.👇

To be clear, Obama's claims are impossible.

Obama's 2016 pandemic playbook did not specify what measures should be used against a pathogen like SARS-CoV-2, or indeed, against any pathogen.

It provides no guidance as to what specific mitigation decisions should be made. Image
The first 41 pages merely specify how the pandemic response should be coordinated administratively and how agencies should work together.

They provide very rough guidelines about what kinds of assessments should be done, leaving the rest up to the experts involved. Image
Read 36 tweets
Jun 7
The media is making the same exact error with bird flu.

For example, @celinegounder commits this error in a recent @statnews piece when she writes:

"Based on prior human infections, it’s estimated that the mortality rate for H5N1 avian flu among humans may be above 50%."
And she is not alone. A recent @newsweek piece poses the ridiculous question: Image
Read 25 tweets
Jun 7
This week @nypost published my latest opinion piece.

I argue that the government's potential response to bird flu is a much larger threat to America than bird flu itself.

In this thread I will explain the science behind my piece in more detail.

🧵 Image
The first issue is the massive overinflation of risk. The expert class did this with swine flu and Covid. And they're doing this with bird flu.

And in the process, they're working up a frenzy--a frenzy that could end up doing a lot of harm--and making a lot of money.
As I wrote about swine flu:
Read 29 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(