I am reposting this comment from a different thread, so while the quotes are not accurate, the sentiment is the same and my comments apply.
The Speaker is Steve Kirsch, and he isn't representing the FDA here.
Sadly this comment reflects the attitude that facts and truth is based on the authority of the people who are saying it.
You don't need to represent FDA to be speaking the truth. All the information shared here by these folks are true and based on actual statistics that cannot be disproven by anyone.
The fact that they are being allowed to share this info in an official, if only as an advisory, setting should be applauded since this makes it easy to get normies to watch it.
This isn't the smoking gun you think it is,
I don't know what your definition of smoking gun is, but there has been smoking guns and fires in the backyards all through out the pandemic. The fact that the main stream hides the smoking gun does not mean it does not exist.
our government isn't acknowledging his statistics just by letting him speak here.
Again, you are missing the point. Its not whether the government is acknowledging his statistics or not. Its the opportunity to allow normies to be exposed to the truth. What they do with it is up to them. They might ask "Did someone disprove these facts?" or they might ask "Did this session affect the way FDA voted?"
For the first question - the answer would be "No".
For the second question - the answer would be "FDA denied EUA for boosters for general population, you draw whatever conclusion you like to draw".
I’m not missing any point. This presentation by Kirsch is being shared as if he was a member of the FDA and not a participant in the public forum. I’m not challenging his data/presentation, just clarifying his role. If we compare this to the election fraud, theres a difference between Mike Lindell proving fraud at a symposium vs an employee from Maricopa County presenting the same the same data. You don’t need to get defensive, we’re on the same side here.
And I will add to this. It is not just Steve who brought up good info to the table. Pretty much most other presenters did the same as well. There were a couple who were clearly Pharma-Buddies, but the rest all had some important point to make against the boosters but sometimes even the vaccines in general.
Perhaps its worth going back and making a post with all the takeaways from all those presenters
I am reposting this comment from a different thread, so while the quotes are not accurate, the sentiment is the same and my comments apply.
Sadly this comment reflects the attitude that facts and truth is based on the authority of the people who are saying it.
You don't need to represent FDA to be speaking the truth. All the information shared here by these folks are true and based on actual statistics that cannot be disproven by anyone.
The fact that they are being allowed to share this info in an official, if only as an advisory, setting should be applauded since this makes it easy to get normies to watch it.
I don't know what your definition of smoking gun is, but there has been smoking guns and fires in the backyards all through out the pandemic. The fact that the main stream hides the smoking gun does not mean it does not exist.
Again, you are missing the point. Its not whether the government is acknowledging his statistics or not. Its the opportunity to allow normies to be exposed to the truth. What they do with it is up to them. They might ask "Did someone disprove these facts?" or they might ask "Did this session affect the way FDA voted?"
For the first question - the answer would be "No".
For the second question - the answer would be "FDA denied EUA for boosters for general population, you draw whatever conclusion you like to draw".
I’m not missing any point. This presentation by Kirsch is being shared as if he was a member of the FDA and not a participant in the public forum. I’m not challenging his data/presentation, just clarifying his role. If we compare this to the election fraud, theres a difference between Mike Lindell proving fraud at a symposium vs an employee from Maricopa County presenting the same the same data. You don’t need to get defensive, we’re on the same side here.
And I will add to this. It is not just Steve who brought up good info to the table. Pretty much most other presenters did the same as well. There were a couple who were clearly Pharma-Buddies, but the rest all had some important point to make against the boosters but sometimes even the vaccines in general.
Perhaps its worth going back and making a post with all the takeaways from all those presenters
His site: https://www.skirsch.io/
Notice ivermectin in his protocols. Good guy methinks.