Arpeggio

It wasn't me, but the data the ONS links to is the same data that showed for all cause deaths up to June 2022: 1 death per 73.3 for the vaccinated 1 death per 263.6 for the unvaccinated We went through this previously when the BBC were lying

It can be emotive, something that is often an attempted trigger. It might be difficult, for example, for the following people who are already being gas lit by Government, to be on here without getting quickly put off, as one assumes it is already quite personal for them. Living with vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis: a qualitative study https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/7/e072658 “This is a significantly challenged group of people, with multiple health, financial, social and psychological losses. These losses have been compounded by experiences of limited governmental and societal recognition of the problems they face........‘I get very angry about the lack of acknowledgement, support, yes. Horrific. No human being should be put through this" We will.

With anonguest, it started to go downhill just after they said things like: "Thanks for the reply." and "So, I ask again, can you cite a source for each of the above very specific statistics you quoted?" That post in question being here Nasty man. "Because IF one sees a fellow rather authoritatively quoting facts and figures, and that fellow makes no claim to being an expert in the field, then it is not at all uncommon for said observer to enquire as to where said fellow got their facts from." 😠😠😠 outrageous

Thanks. I saw the relevant dynamic in the pic. Looks like he's carpet bombing now. BOOM BOOM

lol 😀

You = Bully

He's trying.

Quote "when he came back with the same result again, they knew he was falsifying the data.” Interesting development from what I said 6 years ago in 2017, and of the more recent from 2022. 2017: "Autopsies found as much plaque in the brains of people who died of old age without dementia, as those who died with dementia, casting doubt on the brain plaque theory of dementia. The acetylcholine theory is also out of date." 2022: Two decades of Alzheimer's research may be based on deliberate fraud that has cost millions of lives EXPERIMENTS TO DETERMINE MODE OF SPREAD OF INFLUENZA The relevant part of this JAMA paper can found here; https://ia600708.us.archive.org/view_archive.php?archive=/28/items/crossref-pre-1923-scholarly-works/10.1001%2Fjama.1919.02610250060026.zip&file=10.1001%2Fjama.1919.02610310005002.pdf 1. "The volunteers were all of the most susceptible age, mostly between 18 and 25, only a few of them around 30 years old ; and all were in good physical condition. None of these volunteers, 100 all told in number, had "influenza" Now, we proceeded rather cautiously at first by administering a pure culture of bacillus of influenza, Pfeiffer's bacillus, in a rather moderate amount, into the nostrils of a few of these volunteers. As the preliminary trials proved negative" Oh Well 🤡 2. "....we became bolder, and selecting nineteen of our volunteers, gave each one of them a very large quantity of a mixture of thirteen different strains of the Pfeiffer bacillus, some of them obtained recently from the lungs at necropsy; others were subcultures of varying age,and each of the thirteen had, of course, a different history. Suspensions of these organisms were sprayed with an atomizer into the nose and into the eyes, and back into the throat, while the volunteers were breathing in. We used some billions of these organisms, according to our estimated counts, on each one of the volunteers, but none of them took sick." Oh Well 🤡 3. "Then we proceeded to transfer the virus obtained from cases of the disease ; that is, we collected the material and mucous secretions of the mouth and nose and throat and bronchi from cases of the disease and transferred this to our volunteers. We always obtained this material in the same way : The patient with fever, in bed, has a large, shallow, tray like arrangement before him or her,and we washed out one nostril with some sterile salt solution, using perhaps 5 ce.,which is allowed to run into this tray ; and that nostril is blown vigorously into the tray. This is repeated with the other nostril. The patient then gargles with some of the solution. Next we obtain some bronchial mucus through coughing, and then we swab the mucous surface of each nares (nostrils) and also the mucous membrane of the throat. We place these swabs with the material in a bottle with glass beads, and add all the material obtained in the tray. This is the stuff we transfer to our volunteers. In this particular experiment, in which we used ten volunteers, each of them received a comparatively small quantity of this, about 1 c.c. sprayed into each nostril and into the throat, while inspiring, and on the eye. None of these took sick." Oh Well 🤡 4. "Some of the same material was filtered and instilled (injected) into other volunteers but produced no results." Oh Well 🤡 5. "Each one of these volunteers in this experiment, ten in number, received 6 c.c. of the mixed stuff that I have described. They received it into each nostril ; received it in the throat,and on the eye ; and when you think that 6 c.c. in all was used,you will understand that some of it was swallowed. None of them took sick." Oh Well 🤡 6. "In this experiment we had little cotton swabs on the end of sticks, and we transferred the material directly from nose to nose and from throat to throat, using a West tube for the throat culture, so as to get the material not only from the tonsils, but also from the posterior nasopharynx. None of these volunteers who received the material thus directly transferred from cases took sick in any way. All of the volunteers received at least two, and some of them three "shots" as they expressed it." Oh Well 🤡 7. "Our next experiment consisted in injections of blood. We took five donors, five cases of influenza in the febrile stage, some of them again quite early in the disease. We drew 20 'c.c. from the arm vein of each, making a total of 100 c.c, which was mixed and treated with 1 per cent, of sodium citrate. Ten c.c. of the citrated whole blood were injected into each of the ten volunteers. None of them took sick in any way." Oh Well 🤡 8. "Then we collected a lot of mucous material from the upper respiratory tract, and filtered it through Mandler filters. While these filters will hold back the bacteria of ordinary size, they will allow "ultramicro-scopic" organisms to pass. This filtrate was injected into ten volunteers, each one receiving 3.5 c.c. sub-cutaneously, and none of these took sick in any way." Oh Well 🤡 9. "The volunteer was led up to the bedside of the patient; he was introduced. He sat down alongside the bed of the patient. They shook hands, and by instructions, he got as close as he conveniently could, and they talked for live minutes. At the end of the five minutes, the patient breathed out as hard as he could, while the volunteer, muzzle to muzzle (in accordance with his instructions, about 2 inches between the two), received this expired breath, and at the same time was breathing in as the patient breathed out. This they repeated five times, and they did it fairly faithfully in almost all of the instances. After they had done this for five times, the patient coughed directly into the face of the volunteer,f ace to face, five différent times. After our volunteer had had this sort of contact with the patient, talking and chatting and shaking hands with him for five minutes, and receiving his breath five times, and then his cough five times directly in his face, he moved to the next patient whom we had selected, and repeated this, and so on, until this volunteer had had that sort of contact with ten different cases of influenza, in different stages of the disease, mostly fresh cases, none of them more than three days old. We will remember that each one of the ten volunteers had that sort of intimate contact with each one of the ten different influenza patients. They were watched carefully for seven days and none of them took sick in any way." Oh well 🤡 10. "We started another set of experiments in February that lasted into March, again using fifty volunteers...........These experiments I will not give in detail. They would take too long.......but the way matters turned out became very confusing and perplexing." Oh well. Too “perplexing” 🤡 11. "None of the six men came down with influenza" Oh well 🤡 12. ".....but Dr. L. came down in thirty-six hours, with a clinical attack of influenza, although he had escaped all the rest of the outbreak." Thirty Six hours! 13. "Dr. McCoy, who with Dr. Richey, did a similar series of experiments on Goat Island, San Francisco, used volunteers who, so far as known, had not been exposed to the outbreak at all, also had negative results, that is, they were unable to reproduce the disease. Perhaps there are factors, or a factor, in the transmission of influenza that we do not know." Oh well 🤡

You are easy to psychologically profile.

Two questions. 1. Show proof of your accusation. 2. Did they go to a medical forum instead?

How could you say that? The science was superior.

You posted a study, once. Which ones do you approve of ?

The Devil is shy today.

Would they need to post them too?