Canadian doctor: 13 physicians DEAD since COVID clot shot rollout

[Gators]

Dr . Mak was my RA doctor for 25 years . I spoke to him on Aug 2nd. On Aug 3rd he passed away. He did not drink, smoke was very active in tai chi. He had widow maker after receiving his 4th dosage on Aug 2nd. I had my heart attack the night that I took my 3rd dosage. Why our govt is covering these up?

Canadian doctor: 13 physicians DEAD since COVID clot shot rollout

A Canadian doctor sounded the alarm over the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine after 13 physicians died following the shot’s rollout. Alberta-based physician and cancer researcher Dr. William Makis made this warning as he predicted “many more deaths to come” because of the COVID-19 vaccines...

chemicalviolence.com

 

[dvous11]

Dr . Mak was my RA doctor for 25 years . I spoke to him on Aug 2nd. On Aug 3rd he passed away. He did not drink, smoke was very active in tai chi. He had widow maker after receiving his 4th dosage on Aug 2nd. I had my heart attack the night that I took my 3rd dosage. Why our govt is covering these up?

Pretty clear reason why the gov is covering up the injuries/deaths due to the jabs.
They are LIABLE on multiple levels.

Now...wait for the brainwashed left to start chiming in here demanding "source", or "studies" to defend your claim

 

[kherg007]

Anecdotes are the least reliable sources of evidence.
God forbid someone ask to see systematically collected evidence.

 

[dvous11]

Anecdotes are the least reliable sources of evidence.
God forbid someone ask to see systematically collected evidence.

How do you provide evidence when the entire medical establishment is controlled by the gov and big pharma, who suppress the medical industry in order to make massive profits.
My healthy 80yr old mother had a massive adverse reaction from her 2nd Pfizer jab.
Entire left side of her neck/shoulder/trap area swelled up to beyond double normal size, increased blood pressure, dizzy, etc.
Rushed her to hospital.
They ran EVERY test possible and said "we just can't explain it".
When asked if the jab caused this: "this is very unlikely".
They are so controlled they won't even explore the possibility it was the jab which was the ONLY new variable introduced into her personal intake.
And when I say controlled....it's well known that any medical professional in ontario who would push anything anti-covid narrative was threatened to have their medical practice licenses revoked.
How else can you begin to determine the truth about what's happening without anecdotal references?

 

[kherg007]

Science has procedures/methodologies. Also replication.

I can find anecdotes to support anything.
Do we believe in the enlightenment or do we go back to the dark ages where superstition rules the day?
Not saying anecdotes are entirely useless. Often they do lead to investigations that confirm them (more often not confirm). But as i said, they can be useful. For example, the history of thalidomide. Observations of babies born missing limbs. Led to systematic investigation that showed the drug was responsible.

 

[Adriel]

How do you know that your heart attack was due to the vaccine?

 

[dvous11]

How do you know that your heart attack was due to the vaccine?

This question is exactly the problem.
casting doubt on the obvious.
look at all the excess death data coming out since the jabs were rolled out.
there was no excess death from Covid itself, but clear data evidence post introduction of the jabs.

 

[Adriel]

This question is exactly the problem.
casting doubt on the obvious.
look at all the excess death data coming out since the jabs were rolled out.
there was no excess death from Covid itself, but clear data evidence post introduction of the jabs.

How is this obvious? What is excess death data? Who determines what the appropriate amount of deaths is? Correlation (and I am not even sure there is a correlation) is not causation.

 

[dvous11]

Science has procedures/methodologies. Also replication.

I can find anecdotes to support anything.
Do we believe in the enlightenment or do we go back to the dark ages where superstition rules the day?
Not saying anecdotes are entirely useless. Often they do lead to investigations that confirm them (more often not confirm). But as i said, they can be useful. For example, the history of thalidomide. Observations of babies born missing limbs. Led to systematic investigation that showed the drug was responsible.

Good example with the thalidomide.
watch the info that surfaces over the coming years about the Cjabs.
But….look at the lighting speed profits made by pfizer/Moderna in the meantime, coupled with the intolerant enforced propaganda issued by the governments combined with big pharma paying big tech to censor all dissenting opinions.
If you can’t see the scam you are completely blind and yourself hypnotized by the propaganda machine.

 

[dvous11]

How is this obvious? What is excess death data? Who determines what the appropriate amount of deaths is? Correlation (and I am not even sure there is a correlation) is not causation.

There are professionals citing excess death data everywhere now. Highly accredited and published professionals.
they won’t be found on legacy media.

 

[kherg007]

Good example with the thalidomide.
watch the info that surfaces over the coming years about the Cjabs.
But….look at the lighting speed profits made by pfizer/Moderna in the meantime, coupled with the intolerant enforced propaganda issued by the governments combined with big pharma paying big tech to censor all dissenting opinions.
If you can’t see the scam you are completely blind and yourself hypnotized by the propaganda machine.

There is a loud propaganda machine driven by the antivaxxers, who have routinely put out bs, and who have been supercharged by Russian and Chinese disinformation.

I know science. I know how it works. Its not how you describe. Moreover, its the scientific journals not legacy media one should rely upon.i agree with you getting info from mainstream is fraught w issues too.

Science has built in bs detectors and the reality comes out.

That's a much more reliable approach than relying upon anecdotes. Particularly from equally motivated antivaxxers.

 

[dvous11]

There is a loud propaganda machine driven by the antivaxxers, who have routinely put out bs, and who have been supercharged by Russian and Chinese disinformation.

I know science. I know how it works. Its not how you describe. Moreover, its the scientific journals not legacy media one should rely upon.i agree with you getting info from mainstream is fraught w issues too.

Science has built in bs detectors and the reality comes out.

That's a much more reliable approach than relying upon anecdotes. Particularly from equally motivated antivaxxers.

So then you know that peer reviewed is basically an echo chamber, and results are not repeated, only the cherry picked data which produces favourable results is looked at.
And you also know that studies are funded by the same entities which stand to profit from the results.
And you also know that scientists who counter the studies are shunned and ostracized from future contribution.
bottom line the majority of pharmaceutical “science” is entirely based on shareholder profits not actually providing healing and cures.

 

[kherg007]

So then you know that peer reviewed is basically an echo chamber, and results are not repeated, only the cherry picked data which produces favourable results is looked at.
And you also know that studies are funded by the same entities which stand to profit from the results.
And you also know that scientists who counter the studies are shunned and ostracized from future contribution.
bottom line the majority of pharmaceutical “science” is entirely based on shareholder profits not actually providing healing and cures.

Only about half of what you say is true.
Replication and failures get published. Reviewers are independent. Scientists who find the discrepancy become famous. It's one's data, not opinions, that count. That data is accessible to all scientists.
Still better than anecdotes.

 

[dvous11]

Only about half of what you say is true.
Replication and failures get published. Reviewers are independent. Scientists who find the discrepancy become famous. It's one's data, not opinions, that count. That data is accessible to all scientists.
Still better than anecdotes.

Without the anecdotes there would be much less motivation to explore the data under a new lens of scrutiny, non?

 

[Pleasure Hound]

Dr . Mak was my RA doctor for 25 years . I spoke to him on Aug 2nd. On Aug 3rd he passed away. He did not drink, smoke was very active in tai chi. He had widow maker after receiving his 4th dosage on Aug 2nd. I had my heart attack the night that I took my 3rd dosage. Why our govt is covering these up?

Canadian doctor: 13 physicians DEAD since COVID clot shot rollout

A Canadian doctor sounded the alarm over the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine after 13 physicians died following the shot’s rollout. Alberta-based physician and cancer researcher Dr. William Makis made this warning as he predicted “many more deaths to come” because of the COVID-19 vaccines...

chemicalviolence.com

So, that's your conclusion, huh? Government coverup? Not very original.

I have a suggestion. Why don't you seriously study medicine and become an MD, then study the situation some more. Right now, all you are doing is claiming that because you had a heart attack (sorry to hear that) and your heart doctor died, that nobody else should be receiving the vaccine. That's very unfair to millions of people who the vaccine can help.

I have had 6 shots of the vaccine since 2021. NO heart troubles and NO sudden deaths (unless I am a zombie). How do you explain that?

I have alternative hypotheses. It is possible that both of you have some unknown condition that makes you susceptible to the vaccines in some way. It is also possible that both of your cases are complete coincidences. Since Royal Flushes do happen despite their very low probability of occurring, you still need to consider low probability possibilities. Yet another hypothesis is that you are making this all up to push your agenda. I sincerely hope that the last hypothesis is not true.

Under your logic, nobody should be eating peanuts because a few have deadly peanut allergies. You are not the judge, jury and executioner of vaccines, thankfully.

If you cannot explain how you had a heart attack after your 3rd dose and I have not had any ill effects after my 6th dose, then you have no case.....sorry.....

 

[Pleasure Hound]

So then you know that peer reviewed is basically an echo chamber, and results are not repeated, only the cherry picked data which produces favourable results is looked at.
And you also know that studies are funded by the same entities which stand to profit from the results.
And you also know that scientists who counter the studies are shunned and ostracized from future contribution.
bottom line the majority of pharmaceutical “science” is entirely based on shareholder profits not actually providing healing and cures.

None of what you say is true. I have been a part of the peer review process and I did not see any of what you claim.

Peer review is trying to eliminate biases (what you call "echo chamber") by reviewing all submissions. Several people (not just one) have a very careful look at the manuscript and ask questions about the hypotheses, methods and conclusions. If they see that the data does not lead to the conclusion claimed, then the reviewers will tell the author(s) and will not publish until that problem is rectified.

Yes, it is possible that some reviewers might be biased, but this is why several reviewers look at the documents.

This is not a coverup. It is an attempt to eliminate as much bias as possible. That is the opposite to what you claim.....

 

[glamphotographer]

Questionable source. In fact fake news. Anyways how many handles can Canadaman, spacealien, etc create?

 

[squeezer]

I had 4 glorious shots, run every day well, except Sunday and laugh at the anti-vaxxers when I see them protesting FREEDUMMMMMM!!!!!

 

[Gators]

So, that's your conclusion, huh? Government coverup? Not very original.

I have a suggestion. Why don't you seriously study medicine and become an MD, then study the situation some more. Right now, all you are doing is claiming that because you had a heart attack (sorry to hear that) and your heart doctor died, that nobody else should be receiving the vaccine. That's very unfair to millions of people who the vaccine can help.

I have had 6 shots of the vaccine since 2021. NO heart troubles and NO sudden deaths (unless I am a zombie). How do you explain that?

I have alternative hypotheses. It is possible that both of you have some unknown condition that makes you susceptible to the vaccines in some way. It is also possible that both of your cases are complete coincidences. Since Royal Flushes do happen despite their very low probability of occurring, you still need to consider low probability possibilities. Yet another hypothesis is that you are making this all up to push your agenda. I sincerely hope that the last hypothesis is not true.

Under your logic, nobody should be eating peanuts because a few have deadly peanut allergies. You are not the judge, jury and executioner of vaccines, thankfully.

If you cannot explain how you had a heart attack after your 3rd dose and I have not had any ill effects after my 6th dose, then you have no case.....sorry.....

None of what you say is true. I have been a part of the peer review process and I did not see any of what you claim.

Peer review is trying to eliminate biases (what you call "echo chamber") by reviewing all submissions. Several people (not just one) have a very careful look at the manuscript and ask questions about the hypotheses, methods and conclusions. If they see that the data does not lead to the conclusion claimed, then the reviewers will tell the author(s) and will not publish until that problem is rectified.

Yes, it is possible that some reviewers might be biased, but this is why several reviewers look at the documents.

This is not a coverup. It is an attempt to eliminate as much bias as possible. That is the opposite to what you claim.....

same kind of peer review that was done for VIOXX. When doctors at hospitals can not connect the dots the hospital to report it to health Canada. I may have genetic disorder that predispose me to adverse reaction and many other people.

 

[dvous11]

So, that's your conclusion, huh? Government coverup? Not very original.

I have a suggestion. Why don't you seriously study medicine and become an MD, then study the situation some more. Right now, all you are doing is claiming that because you had a heart attack (sorry to hear that) and your heart doctor died, that nobody else should be receiving the vaccine. That's very unfair to millions of people who the vaccine can help.

I have had 6 shots of the vaccine since 2021. NO heart troubles and NO sudden deaths (unless I am a zombie). How do you explain that?

I have alternative hypotheses. It is possible that both of you have some unknown condition that makes you susceptible to the vaccines in some way. It is also possible that both of your cases are complete coincidences. Since Royal Flushes do happen despite their very low probability of occurring, you still need to consider low probability possibilities. Yet another hypothesis is that you are making this all up to push your agenda. I sincerely hope that the last hypothesis is not true.

Under your logic, nobody should be eating peanuts because a few have deadly peanut allergies. You are not the judge, jury and executioner of vaccines, thankfully.

If you cannot explain how you had a heart attack after your 3rd dose and I have not had any ill effects after my 6th dose, then you have no case.....sorry.....

Easy explanation. Everything affects different people differently. Duh.
That's why a decade of testing as always been the safest way to determine both safety and efficacy of traditional vaccines, as opposed to the micro testing on mice for the covid jabs.
Hey, I can bench 225lbs 10x, but maybe you can't. Why not? Maybe you and I are different?
I can have a headache and take a tylenol and it does nothing....but maybe it'll work for you. Because every human responds differently to medications.
I have friends who have continuing adverse reactions from their 3rd jabs, while others have no reactions.
It's not a one size fits all solution. Insisting it is.....means you're either completely brainwashed, or on the payroll.