I concur - and Dr Zoe Harcombe torpedoes the drivel about cholesterol and animal fats very adroitly too.
Agree 100% about RRR vs ARR - a very big fraud also trotted out with MRNA experimental GT CV19 drugs......Dr MK confirms there is no (proven) connection between cholesterol and CVHD and that epithethial cell damage is a far stronger in…
I concur - and Dr Zoe Harcombe torpedoes the drivel about cholesterol and animal fats very adroitly too.
Agree 100% about RRR vs ARR - a very big fraud also trotted out with MRNA experimental GT CV19 drugs......Dr MK confirms there is no (proven) connection between cholesterol and CVHD and that epithethial cell damage is a far stronger indicator ( how odd - such an action is also a factor in said vaccine induced damage); studies which determined the former are decades old and ignored., surprise surprise - his 3 books are an education how poor your GP can be..... and how beneficial is the (indolent and allegedly unhealthy ) lifestyle of the French ..
No surprise that statins trials concentrated on whether they lowered cholesterol - which they did - but never on reducing mortality which they don't. UK NICE determined cholesterol should be "5" - from a study in US that was funded very substantially by......you guessed it.
UK GPs do not study nutrition and diet to anything other than a token amount......and yet dispense pills by the truckload. QED.
Relative risk is almost always deployed by pharmaceutical companies to make numbers look significant when they aren't. Another tactic is to use surrogate endpoints (such as cholesterol) instead of the actual desired outcome.
I only have a high school education, and even I have learned enough to do rudimentary critical assessment of some scientific studies.
I am in the UK; left school at 18..now have two professional qualifications.one currently benchmarked to a Masters degree.
When people understand that RRR is a comparison between those of the SAME "injected" cohort who did and did not experience the "virus", for example, which the drug trial PI reports as "efficacy" , rather than a comparison - ARR- between the control and placebo groups to demonstrate TRUE efficacy of the injected vs the non injected, they should rightly feel totally conned and become very very angry. This should/will increase by a factor of one hell of a lot when they realise this is the way Big Pharma has fraudulently conducted trials, among many many other criminal practices, for decades. When they THEN realise that the Health Regulatory agencies have known about this , again for decades, actively participated in the cover up and in the case of UK MHRA Chief drug enabler Raine, told barefaced lies that "no corners were cut", their anger should be such as to fire them into action.
A cursory review of Pfizer's trial reports/trial PI's conduct since 2019 tells you everything - but why do you expect when you allow a business which has been fined to the tune of many bns of $ prior to 2019 to take 100% control of the trial metrics for an experimental GT mRNA drug which uses two elements, LNP/ induced production of Sp 1/2 - both proven toxic humans years before 2019 - purely for profit?
"It was never about health". Like you, I do not consider myself blessed with great knowledge - but by dogged effort, IQ ~125/130, and very bad personal experience, I know the fraud of "surrogate endpoints". Trust in authority died some time ago - and will never ever return as long as I have breathe in my lungs
In a Dark Horse podcast, Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying have explained how even saline will give that 83% efficacy rating by using the not-officially-vaccinated-until-two-weeks dodge. This wasn't original to them, but it was a very illuminating conversation.
I concur - and Dr Zoe Harcombe torpedoes the drivel about cholesterol and animal fats very adroitly too.
Agree 100% about RRR vs ARR - a very big fraud also trotted out with MRNA experimental GT CV19 drugs......Dr MK confirms there is no (proven) connection between cholesterol and CVHD and that epithethial cell damage is a far stronger indicator ( how odd - such an action is also a factor in said vaccine induced damage); studies which determined the former are decades old and ignored., surprise surprise - his 3 books are an education how poor your GP can be..... and how beneficial is the (indolent and allegedly unhealthy ) lifestyle of the French ..
No surprise that statins trials concentrated on whether they lowered cholesterol - which they did - but never on reducing mortality which they don't. UK NICE determined cholesterol should be "5" - from a study in US that was funded very substantially by......you guessed it.
UK GPs do not study nutrition and diet to anything other than a token amount......and yet dispense pills by the truckload. QED.
Relative risk is almost always deployed by pharmaceutical companies to make numbers look significant when they aren't. Another tactic is to use surrogate endpoints (such as cholesterol) instead of the actual desired outcome.
I only have a high school education, and even I have learned enough to do rudimentary critical assessment of some scientific studies.
I am in the UK; left school at 18..now have two professional qualifications.one currently benchmarked to a Masters degree.
When people understand that RRR is a comparison between those of the SAME "injected" cohort who did and did not experience the "virus", for example, which the drug trial PI reports as "efficacy" , rather than a comparison - ARR- between the control and placebo groups to demonstrate TRUE efficacy of the injected vs the non injected, they should rightly feel totally conned and become very very angry. This should/will increase by a factor of one hell of a lot when they realise this is the way Big Pharma has fraudulently conducted trials, among many many other criminal practices, for decades. When they THEN realise that the Health Regulatory agencies have known about this , again for decades, actively participated in the cover up and in the case of UK MHRA Chief drug enabler Raine, told barefaced lies that "no corners were cut", their anger should be such as to fire them into action.
A cursory review of Pfizer's trial reports/trial PI's conduct since 2019 tells you everything - but why do you expect when you allow a business which has been fined to the tune of many bns of $ prior to 2019 to take 100% control of the trial metrics for an experimental GT mRNA drug which uses two elements, LNP/ induced production of Sp 1/2 - both proven toxic humans years before 2019 - purely for profit?
"It was never about health". Like you, I do not consider myself blessed with great knowledge - but by dogged effort, IQ ~125/130, and very bad personal experience, I know the fraud of "surrogate endpoints". Trust in authority died some time ago - and will never ever return as long as I have breathe in my lungs
Yet another dodgy technique…
In a Dark Horse podcast, Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying have explained how even saline will give that 83% efficacy rating by using the not-officially-vaccinated-until-two-weeks dodge. This wasn't original to them, but it was a very illuminating conversation.