The biggest threat we face right now is the vaxx injections. Getting people to understand that it is all based on fraud could help awaken people to the idea that they are being lied to. If lied to about this, what else?
The problem is, the lies are so interwoven at this point, that it is hard to untangle and explain. Lies, half-truths, ommission of facts, all make it tough to figure out, even for those of us who are interested in learning what the truth is. For normies, they are often not even aware of the lies at all.
Karen Kingston has been explaining things and peeling back the layers of onion on the fake Pfizer research, but even then you have to watch several of her interviews and at least read the Pfizer summaries (if not the full research reports) to really grasp what they have done and how they have manipulated the truth to spread lies in the media. There are so many lies, even she can't keep track of them all to explain in any one interview (which all have artificial time limits for some reason -- why? It's the f*cking internet, not a TV show!).
I have read the Pfizer summaries and watched several interviews of her and others, and distilled an overview of the fraud. Maybe it can be explained to normies in 1 minute or less, and at least get them to start questioning (which is the first step).
These numbers are approximates, but very close, so that they are easier to remember.
So, we are told that FDA approved the Pfizer drug. That approval is based on the Pfizer drug trial showing "safe and effective." That trial is based partly on a PCR test, which we know is BS. Let's set all that aside, and just assume all of that is valid, for the sake of a simpler explaination.
It goes like this --
- Pfizer had 40,000 subjects in their trial.
- 20,000 in the Control group (placebo), and 20,000 in the Test group (drug)
- 200+ people in the Control group reported a symptom (headache, fever, etc.)
- 400+ people in the Test group (double the number) reported a symptom
- Pfizer tested the 200+ in the Control group with a PCR, and 162 tested positive
- Pfizer tested 9 of the 400+ in the Test group, and then STOPPPED TESTING THEM
- Pfizer claimed that they "ran out of time"
- A Phase III study is supposed to last a minimum of 2 years (2-5 years is the standard)
- Pfizer's Phase III study lasted less than 30 days, but they "ran out of time"
- Of the 9 people in the Test group who got a PCR test, 8 of them tested positive
So --
- MORE people in the Test group felt sick (had a symptom) than in the Control group
- Of the people who actually got a PCR in both groups, MORE (higher percentage) tested positive in the Test group than the Control group
- A 6-month follow-up showed that MORE people in the Test group died than in the Control group
Pfizer's claim of "95% effective" --
- The ONLY reason Pfizer claims their study was a success for the drug is that they STOPPED TESTING the people in the Test group, so that the PCR+ people ended up being a smaller number in the Test group than the Control group -- 8 vs 162 -- but that is ONLY because they stopped testing the Test group
- The real result of the PCR test was 162 out of 287 (56%) in the Control group vs. 8 out of 9 (89%) in the Test group
- It is not a drug trial. It is fraud.
This is what the FDA is using to approve the drug.
This is what the media is reporting as a "successful" drug trial.
Why? (Yes, we know the answer, but it is a question for normies.)
The biggest threat we face right now is the vaxx injections. Getting people to understand that it is all based on fraud could help awaken people to the idea that they are being lied to. If lied to about this, what else?
The problem is, the lies are so interwoven at this point, that it is hard to untangle and explain. Lies, half-truths, ommission of facts, all make it tough to figure out, even for those of us who are interested in learning what the truth is. For normies, they are often not even aware of the lies at all.
Karen Kingston has been explaining things and peeling back the layers of onion on the fake Pfizer research, but even then you have to watch several of her interviews and at least read the Pfizer summaries (if not the full research reports) to really grasp what they have done and how they have manipulated the truth to spread lies in the media. There are so many lies, even she can't keep track of them all to explain in any one interview (which all have artificial time limits for some reason -- why? It's the f*cking internet, not a TV show!).
I have read the Pfizer summaries and watched several interviews of her and others, and distilled an overview of the fraud. Maybe it can be explained to normies in 1 minute or less, and at least get them to start questioning (which is the first step).
These numbers are approximates, but very close, so that they are easier to remember.
So, we are told that FDA approved the Pfizer drug. That approval is based on the Pfizer drug trial showing "safe and effective." That trial is based partly on a PCR test, which we know is BS. Let's set all that aside, and just assume all of that is valid, for the sake of a simpler explaination.
It goes like this --
- Pfizer had 40,000 subjects in their trial.
- 20,000 in the Control group (placebo), and 20,000 in the Test group (drug)
- 200+ people in the Control group reported a symptom (headache, fever, etc.)
- 400+ people in the Test group (double the number) reported a symptom
- Pfizer tested the 200+ in the Control group with a PCR, and 162 tested positive
- Pfizer tested 9 of the 400+ in the Test group, and then STOPPPED TESTING THEM
- Pfizer claimed that they "ran out of time"
- A Phase III study is supposed to last a minimum of 2 years (2-5 years is the standard)
- Pfizer's Phase III study lasted less than 30 days, but they "ran out of time"
- Of the 9 people in the Test group who got a PCR test, 8 of them tested positive
So --
- MORE people in the Test group felt sick (had a symptom) than in the Control group
- Of the people who actually got a PCR in both groups, MORE (higher percentage) tested positive in the Test group than the Control group
- A 6-month follow-up showed that MORE people in the Test group died than in the Control group
Pfizer's claim of "95% effective" --
- The ONLY reason Pfizer claims their study was a success for the drug is that they STOPPED TESTING the people in the Test group, so that the PCR+ people ended up being a smaller number in the Test group than the Control group -- 8 vs 162 -- but that is ONLY because they stopped testing the Test group
- The real result of the PCR test was 162 out of 287 (56%) in the Control group vs. 8 out of 9 (89%) in the Test group
- It is not a drug trial. It is fraud.
This is what the FDA is using to approve the drug.
This is what the media is reporting as a "successful" drug trial.
Why? (Yes, we know the answer, but it is a question for normies.)
The biggest threat we face right now is the vaxx injections. Getting people to understand that it is all based on fraud could help awaken people to the idea that they are being lied to. If lied to about this, what else?
The problem is, the lies are so interwoven at this point, that it is hard to untangle and explain. Lies, half-truths, ommission of facts, all make it tough to figure out, even for those of us who are interested in learning what the truth is. For normies, they are often not even aware of the lies at all.
Karen Kingston has been explaining things and peeling back the layers of onion on the fake Pfizer research, but even then you have to watch several of her interviews and at least read the Pfizer summaries (if not the full research reports) to really grasp what they have done and how they have manipulated the truth to spread lies in the media. There are so many lies, even she can't keep track of them all to explain in any one interview (which all have artificial time limits for some reason -- why? It's the f*cking internet, not a TV show!).
I have read the Pfizer summaries and watched several interviews of her and others, and distilled an overview of the fraud. Maybe it can be explained to normies in 1 minute or less, and at least get them to start questioning (which is the first step).
These numbers are approximates, but very close, so that they are easier to remember.
So, we are told that FDA approved the Pfizer drug. That approval is based on the Pfizer drug trial showing "safe and effective." That trial is based partly on a PCR test, which we know is BS. Let's set all that aside, and just assume all of that is valid, for the sake of a simpler explaination.
It goes like this --
- Pfizer had 40,000 subjects in their trial.
- 20,000 in the Control group (placebo), and 20,000 in the Test group (drug)
- 200+ people in the Control group reported a symptom (headache, fever, etc.)
- 400+ people in the Test group (double the number) reported a symptom
- Pfizer tested the 200+ in the Control group with a PCR, and 162 tested positive
- Pfizer tested 9 of the 400+ in the Test group, and then STOPPPED TESTING THEM
- Pfizer claimed that they "ran out of time"
- A Phase III study is supposed to last a minimum of 2 years (2-5 years is the standard)
- Pfizer's Phase III study lasted less than 30 days, but they "ran out of time"
- Of the 9 people in the Test group who got a PCR test, 8 of them tested positive
So --
- MORE people in the Test group felt sick (had a symptom) than in the Control group
- Of the people who actually got a PCR in both groups, MORE (higher percentage) tested positive in the Test group than the Control group
- A 6-month follow-up showed that MORE people in the Test group died than in the Control group
Pfizer's claim of "95% effective" --
- The ONLY reason Pfizer claims their study was a success for the drug is that they STOPPED TESTING the people in the Test group, so that the PCR+ people ended up being a smaller number in the Test group than the Control group -- 8 vs 162 -- but that is ONLY because they stopped testing the Test group
- The real result of the PCR test was 162 out of 287 (56%) in the Control group vs. 8 out of 9 (89%) in the Test group
- It is not a drug trial. It is fraud.
This what the FDA is using to approve the drug.
This is what the media is reporting as a "successful" drug trial.
Why? (Yes, we know the answer, but it is a question for normies.)