Another relevant question for which we do not yet have an answer: Are the denominators on all these lots the same? If not, could it be that certain lots are much larger than others; hence the uneven distribution of adverse events among lots?
Very interesting, and thank you for posting this. Back in 1985 a friend's infant (8 or 9 months of age at the time) received a pertussis vax that made her begin seizures, and ultimately, this beautiful little girl ended up extremely brain damaged. She's still alive, but has never been able to care for herself or even talk. The parents were involved in a big lawsuit with other people whose children had been similarly damaged, and as I remember, it was due to bad batches of the vaccines. I wish I could remember more details. The mother is now in her mid 70s (the father died a few years back), and I don't know what will happen to this girl when the mother is gone.
Interesting and very possible. It would also be a convenient explanation for the manufacturers to put the problem in a neat box: "it was a bad batch. We're correcting that, and need to ramp up production." If there is a coverup underway, "bad batch" could be a helpful narrative for the defense.
Thanks for the link to The Market Ticker—a very thorough explanation. I suspect it will be ignored by the vaccinators as that is all they’re interested in: inject/infect everyone they possibly can, effectively eliminating the control group as they did in their brief trials.
While I agree with all your seven points, I think there is an even more important thing parents can do for their children getting the vaccine; before and after, give the child vitamins C and E,
because these anti-oxidants may reduce the damage done by the vaccine. Of course the doctors and vaccine manufactorers will oppose this advice because they do not want to admit that the vaccine is a toxin. So do not let them know you are doing it.
1) he needs to cool down the tune. It makes the article better
2) he needs to share his data and calculations and not just point to the ever changing VAERS website.
But most importantly,
3) why does he assume a normal distribution? I would not. I would assume a more Poisson distribution. So instead of plotting and sorting issues per batch he needs to plot # issues vs # of lots. Only then can you conclude this is real.
That said, bad batches is not unthinkable. Everything humans make has bad batches. So it is entirely likely someone messes up once in a while. Normally quality control would catch that, but who knows if they did not rush that either.
That article doesn't just say that specific batches are responsible for most of the AE's, it says that those specific batches were widely distributed, while the other batches were mostly sent to single states, so what we're looking at are not bad batches, but *spiked* batches.
This commenter makes a valid observation "It seems very likely that their is no single vaccine per manufacturer but that there are instead numerous derivations of each designed to test different properties."
"Why would the manufacturers not do this when they have been handed a no-liability exemption in relation to conducting any experiments they choose upon an unsuspecting population. The moreso given that various governments and media are committed to covering up any horrific outcomes and denying all links."
"The companies will never get a better chance to conduct such unfettered experiments on an entire population, no matter how unethical they may be. They appear to be grasping that opportunity with both hands"
Another relevant question for which we do not yet have an answer: Are the denominators on all these lots the same? If not, could it be that certain lots are much larger than others; hence the uneven distribution of adverse events among lots?
Very interesting, and thank you for posting this. Back in 1985 a friend's infant (8 or 9 months of age at the time) received a pertussis vax that made her begin seizures, and ultimately, this beautiful little girl ended up extremely brain damaged. She's still alive, but has never been able to care for herself or even talk. The parents were involved in a big lawsuit with other people whose children had been similarly damaged, and as I remember, it was due to bad batches of the vaccines. I wish I could remember more details. The mother is now in her mid 70s (the father died a few years back), and I don't know what will happen to this girl when the mother is gone.
Interesting and very possible. It would also be a convenient explanation for the manufacturers to put the problem in a neat box: "it was a bad batch. We're correcting that, and need to ramp up production." If there is a coverup underway, "bad batch" could be a helpful narrative for the defense.
Thanks for the link to The Market Ticker—a very thorough explanation. I suspect it will be ignored by the vaccinators as that is all they’re interested in: inject/infect everyone they possibly can, effectively eliminating the control group as they did in their brief trials.
Done. Thank you for the email addresses.
Post-script: The Market Ticker has also analyzed J. & J. and found the exact same thing.
While I agree with all your seven points, I think there is an even more important thing parents can do for their children getting the vaccine; before and after, give the child vitamins C and E,
because these anti-oxidants may reduce the damage done by the vaccine. Of course the doctors and vaccine manufactorers will oppose this advice because they do not want to admit that the vaccine is a toxin. So do not let them know you are doing it.
His analysis is interesting, but I see 3 flaws:
1) he needs to cool down the tune. It makes the article better
2) he needs to share his data and calculations and not just point to the ever changing VAERS website.
But most importantly,
3) why does he assume a normal distribution? I would not. I would assume a more Poisson distribution. So instead of plotting and sorting issues per batch he needs to plot # issues vs # of lots. Only then can you conclude this is real.
That said, bad batches is not unthinkable. Everything humans make has bad batches. So it is entirely likely someone messes up once in a while. Normally quality control would catch that, but who knows if they did not rush that either.
That article doesn't just say that specific batches are responsible for most of the AE's, it says that those specific batches were widely distributed, while the other batches were mostly sent to single states, so what we're looking at are not bad batches, but *spiked* batches.
This commenter makes a valid observation "It seems very likely that their is no single vaccine per manufacturer but that there are instead numerous derivations of each designed to test different properties."
"Why would the manufacturers not do this when they have been handed a no-liability exemption in relation to conducting any experiments they choose upon an unsuspecting population. The moreso given that various governments and media are committed to covering up any horrific outcomes and denying all links."
"The companies will never get a better chance to conduct such unfettered experiments on an entire population, no matter how unethical they may be. They appear to be grasping that opportunity with both hands"