My unorganized thoughts on this piece

The Doctors and other participants on the panel give NO citations whatsoever. They constasntly refer to "the studies" and "the data" yet they won't tell you where you can go to inspect said studies and data for yourself.

Its also common in scientific debate to cite opposition sources so when two groups are butting heads on an issue, the science can remain unbiased. But, unsurprisingly, that's not the case at all here.

This is what propagandists do. They sell you a nice shiny story and tell you all the good solid reasons why you should believe it, but actually give you none of them.

One of the actors says "You would hear about adverse reactions on the news if there were any." Oh my lord. If the medical and scientific community rely on the fake news to tell them if people are having adverse reactions, Lord help us.

When the VAERS question came up, One of the actors said that ~"VAERS is not a robust tabulating mechanism for reactions and is more or less a canary in a coal mine." Well the canary is dead! And they are ignoring it! You can't have your cake and eat it too!

The Q and A section of the video is boilerplate. None of the real questions ever get thru on these things. Just once I want to see this "panel of experts" answer my questions: "Why don't you tell me about the Lancet report on hydroxychloroquine ? How about Dr. Fauci's 2005 paper explaining how masks caused most deaths in the 1917 pandemic? " Any time I actually do get these answered, the response is always the same: "That's been debunked by independent fact-checkers."

The actors here are using guilt to attempt to persuade you to do something which they themselves admit you are skeptical about doing in the first place. Do emotions affect your judgement?

Coincidence that the fake news yesterday listed "opposition to the vaccine" as an indicator for a "terrorist threat" ?

Not once do any of the panel of doctors and experts say the things we would EXPECT them to say:

1. Research your options. It's your choice.
2. Discuss this with your doctor to see if it's right for you. Only your doctor knows your medical history and condition.
3. Get a second opinion if you need to, that's your right.

The actors are telling us there are no side effects, or if there are there will be extremely mild. Just how in the fawk is this allowed? How many commercials have you been programmed with about some stupid headache pill that, coincidentally, has a headache listed as a side effect? Why is big pharma exempt from doing all of these things with the vaccines ? It makes no sense.

One of the actors says "You may not be sick but may be infecting other people." Lets be clear about this, does the vaccine prevent your from spreading the virus? Think logically. Apply common sense. Vaccines cannot prevent infection or spread, period. The only thing they can do is (possibly) prevent the vaccinee from getting sick.

"The delta variant"

"It is the rare 'four leaf clover' to have a doctor say 'I'm not so sure about this vaccine.'" Gee, what happened to all of the doctors who oppose any of this? America's frontline doctors? Haven't they all been kicked off of youtube and all social media? That's your "rare four-leaf clover" -- you've silenced the opposition.

In order to believe any of this drivel, we have to ignore many established facts:

COVID tests are faulty in general.

Tests cannot distinguish flu from covid

Tests cannot distinguish delta variant

The "news" is dishonest and untrustworthy

Most "covid deaths" are actually people who died from SOMETHING ELSE and had a positive covid test (or in many cases, just had symptoms and no test!)

My definition here of "knowing someone" is going to be that you have to be able to write their first name and phone number (accurately) on a piece of paper. Your definition may differ, just make sure you're comparing apples to apples.

Ask. How many people DO YOU KNOW who "got" covid (had a positive test) AND had symptoms equal to or worse than the seasonal flu. My answer is 0. Now ask. How many people do you know who got the vaccine and had an adverse reaction equal to or worse than the seasonal flu. My answer is 2.

The Doctors and other participants on the panel give NO citations whatsoever. They constasntly refer to "the studies" and "the data" yet they won't tell you where you can go to inspect said studies and data for yourself.

Its also common in scientific debate to cite opposition sources so when two groups are butting heads on an issue, the science can remain unbiased. But, unsurprisingly, that's not the case at all here.

This is what propagandists do. They sell you a nice shiny story and tell you all the good solid reasons why you should believe it, but actually give you none of them.

One of the actors says "You would hear about adverse reactions on the news if there were any." Oh my lord. If the medical and scientific community rely on the fake news to tell them if people are having adverse reactions, Lord help us.

When the VAERS question came up, One of the actors said that ~"VAERS is not a robust tabulating mechanism for reactions and is more or less a canary in a coal mine." Well the canary is dead! And they are ignoring it! You can't have your cake and eat it too!

The Q and A section of the video is boilerplate. None of the real questions ever get thru on these things. Just once I want to see this "panel of experts" answer my questions: "Why don't you tell me about the Lancet report on hydroxychloroquine ? How about Dr. Fauci's 2005 paper explaining how masks caused most deaths in the 1917 pandemic? " Any time I actually do get these answered, the response is always the same: "That's been debunked by independent fact-checkers."

The actors here are using guilt to attempt to persuade you to do something which they themselves admit you are skeptical about doing in the first place. Do emotions affect your judgement?

Coincidence that the fake news yesterday listed "opposition to the vaccine" as an indicator for a "terrorist threat" ?

Not once do any of the panel of doctors and experts say the things we would EXPECT them to say:

1. Research your options. It's your choice.
2. Discuss this with your doctor to see if it's right for you. Only your doctor knows your medical history and condition.
3. Get a second opinion if you need to, that's your right.

The actors are telling us there are no side effects, or if there are there will be extremely mild. Just how in the fawk is this allowed? How many commercials have you been programmed with about some stupid headache pill that, coincidentally, has a headache listed as a side effect? Why is big pharma exempt from doing all of these things with the vaccines ? It makes no sense.

One of the actors says "You may not be sick but may be infecting other people." Lets be clear about this, does the vaccine prevent your from spreading the virus? Think logically. Apply common sense. Vaccines cannot prevent infection or spread, period. The only thing they can do is (possibly) prevent the vaccinee from getting sick.

"The delta variant"

"It is the rare 'four leaf clover' to have a doctor say 'I'm not so sure about this vaccine.'" Gee, what happened to all of the doctors who oppose any of this? America's frontline doctors? Haven't they all been kicked off of youtube and all social media? That's your "rare four-leaf clover" -- you've silenced the opposition.

In order to believe any of this drivel, we have to ignore many established facts: COVID tests are faulty in general. Tests cannot distinguish flu from covid Tests cannot distinguish delta variant The "news" is dishonest and untrustworthy Most "covid deaths" are actually people who died and had a positive covid test (or in many cases, just had symptoms and no test!)

My definition here of "knowing someone" is going to be that you have to be able to write their first name and phone number (accurately) on a piece of paper. Your definition may differ, just make sure you're comparing apples to apples.

Ask. How many people DO YOU KNOW who "got" covid (had a positive test) AND had symptoms equal to or worse than the seasonal flu. My answer is 0. Now ask. How many people do you know who got the vaccine and had an adverse reaction equal to or worse than the seasonal flu. My answer is 2.