so i recently e-mailed Steve Kirsch, and told him that his time would be better spent trying to understand the underlying mechanisms for how vaccines cause problems.

---

steve replied with:

"I’m focused on the data".

"Give me 4 examples of why my knowledge and understanding of vaccines is lacking and why I should focus on that."

---

So i set out to give 4 examples,

and as usual it got a little longer than requested.

so this is just my first e-mail reply back,

which was just supposed to be:

4 THINGS ABOUT VACCINE DATA

but it became 12 things...

---

HI Steve,

re: i am focused on the data

the following is not personally directed at you, because i have no idea where you are on your own personal journey into vaccines, or vaccine issues.

but here are "4+ examples" that i would recommend or suggest to any friend or family, who was interested in learning more about vaccine data.

TLDR:

1. THE DATA ARE GARBAGE

2. WE CAN'T VERIFY DATA

3. NO DELINEATION BETWEEN "SAFE" AND "UN-SAFE"

4. NOBODY HAS EVER BEEN ABLE TO USE A STUDY TO FIND A VACCINE PROBLEM

5. THE 4 FAVORITE ARGUMENTS OF PRO-VACCINE SIDE:

ANECDOTE, CORELATION, COINCIDENCE, TEMPORAL

6-12) BONUS META-GIGO

---

1. THE DATA ARE ALL GARBAGE !!!

GIGO - Garbage in, Garbage Out

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garbage_in,_garbage_out

there is no such thing as (credible) vaccine safety or efficacy data.

they simply make-up whatever sounds good.

proof?:

before COVID, it was common knowledge that "no vaccine is 100% effective"

after COVID, they came out with a trial that claimed a COVID vaccine was 100% effective, and nobody batted an eyelash. (except me, and you)

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/31/health/pfizer-vaccine-adolescent-trial-results/index.html

more proof?

August 27, 2014 CDC whistleblower Dr William Thompson's press release:

re CDC omitting SS data from 2004 vaccine autism study published in journal of pediatrics.

https://i.redd.it/1rb482xb9ty41.png

2. WE CAN'T "VERIFY VERIFY VERIFY" THE DATA

Brian Deer is the guy who took down Dr Andrew Wakefield

Dr Andrew Wakefield was the research-laboratory-beakers-and-test-tubes type "doctor" who published a study that suggested we look into vaccines and autism.

Brian Deer is the man who bird-dogged Andrew Wakefield for 12 years,

until eventually Wakefield's paper had been RETRACTED with great media fanfare.

and Wakefield has been the go-to FOIL for when vaccine-autism link is brought up

pro-vaccine side: NOPE!!! WAKEFIELD!!!

during this time, it appears that BRIAN DEER was a HATCHET MAN that was assigned to DR WAKEFIELD, and someone paid BRIAN DEER's BILLS, while Brian Deer relentlessly went after Wakefield for 12 years.

it's curious that Brian Deer was praised for (allegedly?) contacting Dr Andrew Wakefield's study participants, and finding discrepancies between what the participants had said, and what Dr Wakefield's (allegedly false) data had shown.

background story here:

Keeping Anderson Cooper Honest: Is Brian Deer The Fraud? Brian Deer is the "journalist" who bird-dogged Dr Wakefield for years after Wakefield published a paper that was unflattering to vaccines

https://www.ageofautism.com/2011/01/keeping-anderson-cooper-honest-is-brian-deer-the-fraud.html

more about Brian Deer

https://www.autisminvestigated.com/brian-deer-cnn-bre-payton/

but if you or i would "contact study participants", then that would be considered "harassing" the study participants.

we would be arrested, and publicly ridiculed.

see how that works?

you can never fact-check their so-called data, because YOU are a just a creepy stalker who is bent on harassing anyone who dares to participate in a study!

THEY can't allow YOU to "harass" study participants, because then people would quit participating in studies!

so their "data" are hidden behind bogus "privacy" concerns

market opportunity? open studies. participants agree to make themselves be "open" to inquiry. entire medical history published and open to scrutiny.

3. there is no hard-and-fast rule for deciding what is "safe" and what is "NOT safe"

they do a study. they look at the results. they shrug their shoulders and say "meh, looks safe to me"

i have asked numerous pro-vaccine people (internet users, trolls? shills? true believers? scientists?)

they can't show us an example, of what a study might look like, if that study was to have shown that some vaccine was "NOT safe"

during a SCOTUS case, vaccines were deemed to be "UNAVOIDABLY UNSAFE"

4. Nobody in the history of the world, has ever been able to use a vaccine study, to find a previously unknown vaccine problem.

because vaccine studies are not do to see "IF" a vaccine causes a problem,

a vaccine study is done for the sole purpose of "NOT finding" a vaccine problem.

and so they say "WE CAN'T FIND ANY EVIDENCE THAT VACCINES CAUSE X"

and they TRUMPET their own failure to find evidence, as some sort of VICTORY.

because it is a victory. its what they set out to do, to NOT "find the evidence"

vaccine logic quip:

whenever i can't find my keys, i always assume that means my keys don't exist!

and because nobody has ever been able to use a study to find a vaccine problem, it is assumed that every vaccine is arbitrarily deemed "safe"

then, since the "consensus" of studies say a vaccine is "safe",

anything that comes along to contradict is already considered an outlier.

THE 4 FAVORITE ARGUMENTS

of the pro-vaccine side are:

ANECDOTE, COINCIDENCE, TEMPORAL, CORRELATION.

your "empirical" evidence is merely "anecdotal".

they are coincidence theorist, but you are conspiracy theorist.

vaccine logic: your anecdotal temporal spurious correlations actually preclude causations!

temporal association: just because vaccine came before high fever, doesn't mean vaccine caused high fever.

could be genetic? (shrugs shoulders)

for example:

your "high fever" is just a coincidental, anecdotal, temporal correlation!

and since correlations preclude causation, theres no way the vaccine could have caused your "high" fever!

CONSENSUS DOES NOT MEAN UNANIMOUS

"science" is currently being decided by a vote.

if 50%+1 of voters say the vaccine is safe and effective, that becomes a "consensus"

and everything else is misinformation or disinformation, and subject to censorship

SHOW ME

Missouri: The "SHOW ME" State!

"Show me" can mean many things, to many people

If you say "Show me the data"

and i say THE DATA ARE GIGO

and i say "Show Me" the vaccine injuries,

even though they are "anecdotal"

you start to notice patterns real fast.

"FEVER" is an excellent example,

because everyone understands how to measure fever with thermometer.

and everyone know the difference between 98.6F and 106F

if you were to only follow ONE thing, i would make it FEVER.

fever is the gateway to understanding other vaccine-induced problems.

SHOW ME WHERE 5% STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE COMES FROM

SHOW ME the actual math, like pencil on paper, for homework, turned in for a grade kind of SHOW ME.

The truth is, the 5% threshold for "statistics significance" is arbitrarily selected by the study authors, based on nothing more than their own arbitrary preferences, biases, assumptions, habits,

They could pick some other number, other than 5%, if they wanted to. its completely an arbitrary decision, decided unilaterally by the study author.

HOW "PEER REVIEW" ACTUALLY WORKS:

IF study shows vaccines are GOOD,

THEN study is a GOOD study.

IF study shows vaccines are BAD,

THEN study is a BAD study

Because of the GATEKEEPERS,

Your (vaccine critical) studies will NOT get published,

Unless your study goes along with the "consensus" of the vaccine establishment,

This perpetuates the status quo.

10. META-GIGO

So even when they do a so-called "META STUDY" they are only including studies that made it past the gatekeepers.

META STUDY: MORE GARBAGE IN, MORE GARBAGE OUT

WITH VACCINES, IT'S BEST TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION.

since it is impossible to know anything for sure, about vaccines,

the best course of action, and avoid vaccines altogether!

12. The So-Called "Danish Study" was a FRAUD

POUL THORSEN HAS HIS OWN "WANTED BY FBI" POSTER

https://i.redd.it/p0vorp2qeszy.jpg