How much MORE evidence do we need to prove beyond doubt that the mRNA Covid-19 shots kill?

[richard_smith237]

18 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

I said that I don't know whether I received any vaccines before 7 year of age. 

Well possible that my parents skipped them, and unfortunately as both are deceased, I am not able to enquire anymore. 

Also the current discussion is of little relevance for this thread, so I will refrain from answering any responses to it.

 

Fair enough - done to death in other threads already.

 

As for "How much MORE evidence do we need to prove beyond doubt that the mRNA Covid-19 shots kill"...  None, no more evidence is needed to answer that simple question...  

 

Its with absolute certainty that the Covid-19 mRNA vaccines have been the direct cause of some deaths....  There is no substance on earth that someone doesn't have an allergy to etc ... there are even people who have allergy to water, sunlight etc...

 

 

The important question is two fold I would say: 

1) Are the Covid-19 mRNA vaccines are more dangerous than regular Covid-19 vaccines, disproportionately so compared to their efficacy.

2) Are Covid-19 mRNA vaccines are more dangerous and more harmful than than can be reasonably expected when compared to any other vaccines taken throughout the past half a century ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[jas007]

32 minutes ago, rumak said:

 

Well, genetics is one factor, i would think.   But personally I place the biggest factor on what one does with what one has.

Its easy to say "oh, i'm sick because it runs in my family .... and I am sure that is the big cop out for the majority of heart patients,  diabetes sufferers, fat people , arthritic, and on and on.    

Anyway.... very glad you are doing well.   We will have to have an arm wrestling match when we meet up  .  555  just kidding,    I am a wee bit older than you .  The famous orthepedist in CM  , after he checked me, put his thumb up .  "you are much better than most people i see " .

Maybe it's different for everyone.  And yes, it helps immensely if you make the most of what you have.  

 

But looking at some of the people in my grandfathers generation, I can only conclude that genetics plays a huge role.  Did they eat good food?  A Mediterranean Diet, not because they were trying to be healthy, but because that's what they were used to eating in Southern Italy, and it was easy enough to find that same food in New York. Did they drink wine all the time? Yep, but again, that's probably par for the course where they came from.  And during Prohibition, they made their own wine in big barrels. Anyway, they all lived a long time and I'm sure they weren't event trying to do that.  

[Stiddle Mump]

58 minutes ago, Magictoad said:

Why would we volunteer to go into a cesspit of propaganda and misinformation when you bring it here!  Polio is a real and dreadful disease which the police vaccine saved US from. Note I say US because you were saved too.

Nonsense! 

 

The incidence of Polio was greatly diminished before any jab came along. Polio is not caused by a virus nor is it contagious.

[richard_smith237]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

4 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Then there’s Stiddle, whose posts are so absurd they’re only worth engaging with on occasion.

 

Thank-you for proving my point with far greater certainty than I did... 

 

Thank-you once again... you are proving my point so very well..... 

 

Brilliant... Again... thank-you !!!...  You're doing such a good job of this... 

 

 

5 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Nonsense! 

 

The incidence of Polio was greatly diminished before any jab came along. Polio is not caused by a virus nor is it contagious.

 

[blackybiker]

7 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

Maybe because you are a resilient bastard...

Tremendous variation in strength and different content between batches of "vaccines" (proven over and over). Placebos mixed with the poisons (politicians flamboyantly rolling up their sleeves for the TV cameras), saline solution injections. 

 

Most sinister of all is the delayed effect, making it quite difficult to pin the blame on the mRNA when it took place several years before. Some people complain about immediate effects; others get the side effects within a matter of weeks. Still others will not show the myocarditis or pericarditis for several years. This provides deniability for the vax-cheerleaders.

 

Small children never get the virus. Why give them a powerful gene therapy injection that was not subjected at all to the typical five- or ten-year scientific test? 

 

Follow the money.

[richard_smith237]

3 minutes ago, blackybiker said:

Tremendous variation in strength and different content between batches of "vaccines" (proven over and over). Placebos mixed with the poisons (politicians flamboyantly rolling up their sleeves for the TV cameras), saline solution injections. 

 

False rubbish - You are referring to Matt Hancock taking the Pfizer/BioNTech Vaccine Lived on TV in April 2021...   there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest fakery with a saline solution....   

 

 

3 minutes ago, blackybiker said:

Most sinister of all is the delayed effect, making it quite difficult to pin the blame on the mRNA when it took place several years before. Some people complain about immediate effects; others get the side effects within a matter of weeks. Still others will not show the myocarditis or pericarditis for several years. This provides deniability for the vax-cheerleaders.

 

Completely non-sensible rubbish...  total tosh... none of what you write has any accuracy whatsoever...    you just meynder through a paragraph with anti-vax sentiment without actually making any real point.

 

 

3 minutes ago, blackybiker said:

Small children never get the virus. Why give them a powerful gene therapy injection that was not subjected at all to the typical five- or ten-year scientific test? 

 

Follow the money.

 

Children caught Covid-19....    

[gamb00ler]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

By age 7, a Belgian child born in 1957 would likely have received the following vaccines:

- Smallpox

- Diphtheria

- Tetanus

- Pertussis (whooping cough)

- Polio 

 

That you ask for proof of what vaccines you took as a child were of benefit is a masterclass in argumentative incompetence, the proof is all around you, everywhere....  but you dismiss it.    You may as well post another meme.

Plus @Red Phoenix benefits from the vaccine induced immunity of others around him, regardless of his own vaccination status.

[gamb00ler]

1 hour ago, Red Phoenix said:

By the way, none of my 3 very healthy children (34, 32 and 26) did receive ANY vaccine, while under my care.

You still pretend that vaccination wasn't necessary to protect your children without realizing that the vaccination of the vast majority of your children's peers was extremely relevant.  You are too incompetent to perform serious analysis because you do not think past the surface layer of an issue.

 

Perhaps if you ate more onions you would realize that most issues have several layers.

[richard_smith237]

4 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

You still pretend that vaccination wasn't necessary to protect your children without realizing that the vaccination of the vast majority of your children's peers was extremely relevant.  You are too incompetent to perform serious analysis because you do not think past the surface layer of an issue.

 

Absolutely spot on... 

[Red Phoenix]

10 hours ago, blackybiker said:

Tremendous variation in strength and different content between batches of "vaccines" (proven over and over). Placebos mixed with the poisons (politicians flamboyantly rolling up their sleeves for the TV cameras), saline solution injections. 

 

Most sinister of all is the delayed effect, making it quite difficult to pin the blame on the mRNA when it took place several years before. Some people complain about immediate effects; others get the side effects within a matter of weeks. Still others will not show the myocarditis or pericarditis for several years. This provides deniability for the vax-cheerleaders.

 

Small children never get the virus. Why give them a powerful gene therapy injection that was not subjected at all to the typical five- or ten-year scientific test? 

 

Follow the money.

[TedG]

10 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Nonsense! 

 

The incidence of Polio was greatly diminished before any jab came along. Polio is not caused by a virus nor is it contagious.

This is not even remotely true. 

[TedG]

12 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

Total BS.   

[Red Phoenix]

9 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

Plus @Red Phoenix benefits from the vaccine induced immunity of others around him, regardless of his own vaccination status.

My vaccination status: 

[Stiddle Mump]

9 minutes ago, TedG said:

This is not even remotely true. 

What do you think Polio actually is?

 

IMO, caused by poisons entering the body. Not contagious. No virus involved. Polio fell off a cliff in the US when DDT use was greatly reduced.

 

However! Polio has not gone away. Just undergone a name-change.

[TedG]

35 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

What do you think Polio actually is?

 

IMO, caused by poisons entering the body. Not contagious. No virus involved. Polio fell off a cliff in the US when DDT use was greatly reduced.

 

However! Polio has not gone away. Just undergone a name-change.

Polio, or poliomyelitis, is a highly contagious infectious disease caused by the poliovirus. The virus attacks the nervous system, potentially leading to paralysis and, in rare cases, death. While polio is now rare in many parts of the world due to effective vaccines, it remains a concern in some areas, especially among unvaccinated individuals

[Red Phoenix]

9 hours ago, gamb00ler said:

You still pretend that vaccination wasn't necessary to protect your children without realizing that the vaccination of the vast majority of your children's peers was extremely relevant.  You are too incompetent to perform serious analysis because you do not think past the surface layer of an issue.

 

Perhaps if you ate more onions you would realize that most issues have several layers.

Total hogwash.  

To expand on your 'onion layer' analogy > The surface layer is what you are being told by the corrupt medical establishment and all its cronies (Big Pharma advertisement money dependent media, Big Pharma funded studies and journals that publish them, Public Health and medical regulation institutes, University curriculums, etc. etc. ).  And for more than 100 years that original - Rockefeller originated - lie about germs and vaccines has spread and it has metastised in current allopathic 'modern' medicine.  Nobody is immune to that immense propaganda to which they have been exposed 24/7 all their life.  And those that dare question some of the core beliefs/dogmas of that fable (questioning 'settled' beliefs is what real science is all about) are of course ridiculed and demonized.  Threatening that multi-trillion $ house of cards by exposing its false and dodgy presumptions, is not appreciated.  But the number of those that peeled of the surface layer of the onion, or by personal experience (e.g. vaccine harm) had a glimpse of what lies under that surface, is slowly but steadily growing.  

Yes I am 'dangerous' - or rather my ideas on these issues - and I will NOT shut up by those that prefer living the lie...   

 

[Stiddle Mump]

18 minutes ago, TedG said:

Polio, or poliomyelitis, is a highly contagious infectious disease caused by the poliovirus. The virus attacks the nervous system, potentially leading to paralysis and, in rare cases, death. While polio is now rare in many parts of the world due to effective vaccines, it remains a concern in some areas, especially among unvaccinated individuals

Are those you own words Ted bud, or did you lift them from somewhere? In either case they are totally wrong.

 

Polio is a illness caused by toxicity. It is not contagious.

 

Is the virus getting the blame for illness that stop the guilty from having the fingers pointed at them? I think so. So much of the illness we see around is caused by poor practices. By blaming a virus, the polluters are let off the hook.

 

Real shame when money is put before human wellbeing.

 

Nature has the answers we seek.

[Woke to Sounds]

It's a question of Do you believe anything you're told by anyone in authority.

 

You can't spell believe without lie.

 

Long game being played, lads.

[Stiddle Mump]

39 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

Total hogwash.  

To expand on your 'onion layer' analogy > The surface layer is what you are being told by the corrupt medical establishment and all its cronies (Big Pharma advertisement money dependent media, Big Pharma funded studies and journals that publish them, Public Health and medical regulation institutes, University curriculums, etc. etc. ).  And for more than 100 years that original - Rockefeller originated - lie about germs and vaccines has spread and it has metastised in current allopathic 'modern' medicine.  Nobody is immune to that immense propaganda to which they have been exposed 24/7 all their life.  And those that dare question some of the core beliefs/dogmas of that fable (questioning 'settled' beliefs is what real science is all about) are of course ridiculed and demonized.  Threatening that multi-trillion $ house of cards by exposing its false and dodgy presumptions, is not appreciated.  But the number of those that peeled of the surface layer of the onion, or by personal experience (e.g. vaccine harm) had a glimpse of what lies under that surface, is slowly but steadily growing.  

Yes I am 'dangerous' - or rather my ideas on these issues - and I will NOT shut up by those that prefer living the lie...   

 

I pretty much agree with that Red Sir.

 

I'll just add that it is so easy to shout 'virus', and that stops, stone dead, discussion about the real causes of an illness. As I've posted before, nature has the answers. It is not in nature's interest to have viruses lurking; waiting to pounce. These pathogen viruses only exist in computers. and before computers; in the imagination. But what is real, is the filth that is being pumped onto our land, into our waterways and oceans. The air we breathe is not as clean as it should be either.

 

the world need to get a grip. Our beautiful earth has enough for everyone to live in comfort and want for nothing. The make-believe, phantom 'virus' is one of the major stumbling blocks for that to be realised.

[Red Phoenix]

38 minutes ago, Woke to Sounds said:

It's a question of Do you believe anything you're told by anyone in authority.

You can't spell believe without lie.

Long game being played, lads.

My basic attitude when being told something is that I give everybody - including anyone in authority - the benefit of the doubt on what they tell me.  So, in essence I am more 'gullible' than 'critical' when somebody tells me something. 

Also when the information provided clashes with the knowledge I have, I do not dismiss it automatically but consider whether I need to change my stance in view of the new information.  Totally baseless statements will of course be immediately dismissed (e.g. the @transam nonsense goes straight into the garbage bin).  But well-reasoned pieces of information backed up with trustworthy facts and data, are subject to further research.  E.g. I do not immediately dismiss what @richard_smith237 or @TedG post, but do consider what they write and where relevant do some further research on a specific topic that they bring up. 

And the outcome of that research will determine whether I change my stance or keep to it.  

Having used that approach for as long as I can remember, makes it relatively easy to cut through the bull<deleted> or immediately see inconsistencies in what I read and hear.  And yes I have changed my position on certain topics, e.g. my previous assumption that pathogenic viruses could be one of the sources that make you ill, has been dismissed on researching that issue. 

[TedG]

33 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

My basic attitude when being told something is that I give everybody - including anyone in authority - the benefit of the doubt on what they tell me.  So, in essence I am more 'gullible' than 'critical' when somebody tells me something. 

Also when the information provided clashes with the knowledge I have, I do not dismiss it automatically but consider whether I need to change my stance in view of the new information.  Totally baseless statements will of course be immediately dismissed (e.g. the @transam nonsense goes straight into the garbage bin).  But well-reasoned pieces of information backed up with trustworthy facts and data, are subject to further research.  E.g. I do not immediately dismiss what @richard_smith237 or @TedG post, but do consider what they write and where relevant do some further research on a specific topic that they bring up. 

And the outcome of that research will determine whether I change my stance or keep to it.  

Having used that approach for as long as I can remember, makes it relatively easy to cut through the bull<deleted> or immediately see inconsistencies in what I read and hear.  And yes I have changed my position on certain topics, e.g. my previous assumption that pathogenic viruses could be one of the sources that make you ill, has been dismissed on researching that issue. 

I can’t believe you put so much time and effort into posting easily debunable misinformation. .  

[still kicking]

14 hours ago, TedG said:

 

The only war monger is Putin. 

You forgot the Israeli crime minister.

[transam]

1 hour ago, Red Phoenix said:

My basic attitude when being told something is that I give everybody - including anyone in authority - the benefit of the doubt on what they tell me.  So, in essence I am more 'gullible' than 'critical' when somebody tells me something. 

Also when the information provided clashes with the knowledge I have, I do not dismiss it automatically but consider whether I need to change my stance in view of the new information.  Totally baseless statements will of course be immediately dismissed (e.g. the @transam nonsense goes straight into the garbage bin).  But well-reasoned pieces of information backed up with trustworthy facts and data, are subject to further research.  E.g. I do not immediately dismiss what @richard_smith237 or @TedG post, but do consider what they write and where relevant do some further research on a specific topic that they bring up. 

And the outcome of that research will determine whether I change my stance or keep to it.  

Having used that approach for as long as I can remember, makes it relatively easy to cut through the bull<deleted> or immediately see inconsistencies in what I read and hear.  And yes I have changed my position on certain topics, e.g. my previous assumption that pathogenic viruses could be one of the sources that make you ill, has been dismissed on researching that issue. 

Do you know why most countries have banned hanging, etc, It's because they may make a mistake......🤗

 

[StandardIssue]

22 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

That's actually a rhetorical question, because the evidence at this moment in time is so monumentally overwhelming that those that still deny the harms of mRNA Covid-19 shots are either paid pharma-shills or are doing so 'by habit'.  After 4-5 years of the evidence building up, and continually growing, the deniers are so entrenched in their position that no matter what facts and data are presented, these are routinely dismissed.  Facts and data presented are no longer challenged, their only arguments being ad hominem attacks (targetting the messenger, and not the message), ridicule and 'anti-vaxxer' insults.  

 

They simply closed their eyes and ears for the facts, blinded by the 24/7 Big Pharma propaganda that wanted to convince everybody that black is white and the jabs are safe, effective and necessary. 

A quick memory refresher of what they '(dis)missed':

• The early VAERS data spoke volumes. Ignoring the main reason for the collection of these data.
• People suddenly collapsing during live-broadcasts and athletes collapsing on the field also on live TV (and this in fairly large numbers).
• Ed Dowd, exposing the disaster by showing the rise in all cause mortality data (the one set of data that cannot be manipulated).  And life insurance executives confirming the rising deaths in working-age people. 
• Early as well as continual warnings from experts in their fields (e.g. cardiology, oncology, bio-statisticans, etc.) censored and suppressed.

There is much more, but it is all to no avail.  

As the dutch proverb goes 'What use are candles and glasses if the owl doesn't want to see' 

 

This as introduction to once again a giant nail in the coffin of the Jab-harm deniers.  

> The consistent pattern when you plot deaths following Covid-19 jabs in a time-series.  

The shots do not prevent you from catching Covid (claiming different was one of the early lies, on which the jab-enthusiasts had to backtrack).  And the new message now is that they prevent serious illness and death.  If that were true you would expect a stable or even declining trend-line of deaths after the covid-shots.  

And the point is that this holds true for the majority of OTHER vaccines, but NOT for the Covid-19 death-shots.  

That's also the reason that the compromised Pharma-advertisement funded mainstream media never publish these graphs.

 

In my next post in this thread I will provide the link and some excerpts of articles by Steve Kirsch that demonstrate that the Covid-19 shots do NOT protect you, but are slow-kill injections as proven by all the time-series graphs from different countries. 

 

= = = 

 

RFK is looking for "experts" to fill the recent vacancies at the CDC, are you looking for a job or what?

[Woke to Sounds]

1 hour ago, Red Phoenix said:

My basic attitude when being told something is that I give everybody - including anyone in authority - the benefit of the doubt on what they tell me.  So, in essence I am more 'gullible' than 'critical' when somebody tells me something. 

 

Hey if it works for you...

 

No one in authority is interested in anything except feathering their own nest.

 

They certainly do not care 1 iota about you, your family, me or anyone else outside their little circle.

 

They are narcissistic sociopaths.

[save the frogs]

11 hours ago, Woke to Sounds said:

 

Hey if it works for you...

 

No one in authority is interested in anything except feathering their own nest.

 

They certainly do not care 1 iota about you, your family, me or anyone else outside their little circle.

 

They are narcissistic sociopaths.

 

No, that's complete nonsense.

 

Many Westerners have comfortable lives due to efforts to keep society functioning reasonably well by those in power. Some don't do well, but ... 

 

Even Thai authorities work hard to attract more tourists to give opportunities for the population to earn a decent living. 

 

To suggest authorities only care about themselves is a cartoonish caricature of reality. 

 

Some people just love to constantly criticize authorities and blame authorities for their misery. 

 

 

[Woke to Sounds]

8 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

Some people just love to constantly criticize authorities and blame authorities for their misery. 

 

I'm not miserable.

 

But I can spot a narcissistic sociopath a mile away.

 

Those in positions of power are not there to be nice to you.

 

But believe what you want.

[richard_smith237]

On 6/11/2025 at 6:36 PM, TedG said:

1) Did it ever occur to you that people start to die at a higher rate over the age of 80? 

2) Here is the study in question.   https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32120383/

 

It never ceases to amaze me just how wilfully oblivious some anti-vaxxers can be to the blindingly obvious - as if slapping a meme or a quote onto a thread somehow annihilates the most basic principles of common sense.

 

Your example captures this absurdity in pristine form: the laughable claim that people over 80 years old who received the influenza vaccine died at a higher rate. Well of course they did - they were older and more likely to die regardless.

 

It’s as moronic as presenting “evidence” that no one who took a vaccine after the age of 90 survived another 30 years - as if that proves anything beyond the staggering density of the person making the claim.

 

The sheer idiocy and mind-warping absurdity of trotting out examples like this genuinely beggars belief.