Nonconsequential Patterns in the deployment of Toxic Covid Vaccine Batches. By Craig Paardekooper
Many characteristics of this deployment suggest that they were carrying out discreet dosage toxicity testing.
Highly toxic batches cluster together in close temmporal proximity, i.e. they appear in clusters close to each other in time.
These sequential clusters are abruptly seperated by clear periods during which only harmless batches are deployed.
The Toxicity of these toxic batches is not random, but rather is clustered into narrow ranges of toxicity
The clusters of batches occupy ranges of toxicity that are distinct from one another, and follow a stepwise linier decline; each step being equal in size and punctuated by a clear period where only harmless batches are deployed.
The batch steps were in sequential order, up to 3000x, 2500x, 2000x and 1500x the toxicity of batches denoted "Harmless".
Or............. it is a load of garbage misinformation.
How do you know this analysis is real?
Since the publisher says toxic many times per minute, he can hardly be considered to ne neutral.
@willing-vaccinee
Interesting troll there. A field in the VAERS entry is the vaccine batch number. So the analysis is straight forward to do.
And if you care to dig though the relevant FDA discussion documents over the last few decades you will see that problematic batches for *all* vaccines is a known problem, and one that the FDA and the industry has gone to great lengths to try to minimize. Thats why the batch number is part of the VAERS case record. To help with early detection.
Given the irresponsible haste in the roll out of these novel SARs CoV 2 vaccine types and the ramp up in manufacture in volumes several orders of magnitudes greater that for all previous attempts it hardly surprising that faulty batches should show up with far higher frequency than with long established and mature vaccine types.
And given that these novel vaccines need very strong adjuvants and use unproven delivery packaging which are strong immuno irritants its even less surprising that any problems tend to be toxicological rather than just one of being inert or ineffective. Which is a more typical problem with traditional vaccines.
@willing-vaccinee
Interesting troll there. A field in the VAERS entry is the vaccine batch number. So the analysis is straight forward to do.
And if you care to dig though the relevant FDA discussion documents over the last few decades you will see that problematic batches for *all* vaccines is a known problem, and one that the FDA and the industry has gone to great lengths to try to minimize. Thats why the batch number is part of the VAERS case record. To help with early detection.
Given the irresponsible haste in the roll out of these novel SARs CoV 2 vaccine types and the ramp up in manufacture in volumes several orders of magnitudes greater that for all previous attempts it hardly surprising that faulty batches should show up with far higher frequency than with long established and mature vaccine types.
And given that these novel vaccines need very strong adjuvants and use unproven delivery packaging which are strong immuno irritants its even less surprising that any problems tend to be toxicological rather than just one of being inert or ineffective. Which is a more typical problem with traditional vaccines.
you think they are just problems, not a grusome plan? But that is only part of the picture, mike yeadon (for it is he behind the scenes) has his own analysis for the patterns, and for mike, only one thing can account for the peculiar regularity in the data, a macabre BIG PHARMA conspiracy to do DOSE RANGE-FINDING calibration for lethal outcomes, here's mickey
https://seemorerocks.is/dr-mike-yeadon-urgent-depopulation-through-injection/
So @jmc, what is it, a big conspiracy by big pharma to kill everybody?Like Mike Yeadon thinks....in general three people can keep a secret, but only when two of them are dead, and this is going to be a big thing when it comes out, pfizer, moderna, and J and J are all going to crash, I could short them, but I'd have to get the timing just right.
It is all very well saying the analysis is easy to do, but that doesn't mean you should believe some claims of a person on the fringes of social media, who makes some claims.
Given that the starting data is not reliable (any nutter can make an entry), and the fact the claimant has a bad reputation should ring alarm bells. It would be easy to download data into a spreadsheet and start manipulating.
Unless the work is transparent and published, reviewed and caters for all possible confounding factors, it must be ignored.
Anyone who accepts it at face value is an idiot.
@95-protected
You obviously dont know how this works. VAERS is a public system allowing *anyone* who is interested to mine the data. It was created for the very specific purpose. As a second line product quality monitoring system. Which I have been using to do informally since the start of December 2020. Like a lot of other people with very serious mathematical and analytics backgrounds.
So according to you only "qualified people" are allowed to do the data analysis. Well if you had spent much time over the years reading the published papers of the "qualified people" and then seen some of the recent second opinion data analysis by those who are not "qualified people" the overwhelming impression is that almost all the "qualified people" know f*ck all mathematics. The "unqualified people" mostly have a far better grasp of the maths involved.
Sure the "qualified people" may have passed their bio-informatice 101 exam and learned enough of how to use the various R python packages to produce fancy graphs and table but time after time they are showing a complete ignorance of the basis of maths involved. For example, the number of mathematically rigorous epidemiological models I have read so far (published and unpublished) can be counted on the fingers of a clenched fist. They all have very basic errors. Like making up values for key variables that are easily found in the relevant literature. And so on all the way though the model process. Making what would be considered basic undergrad mistakes in the hard sciences.
As for the bad vaccine batch problem. This is very basic industrial process quality control maths. Just give your software of choice the data set and set the equivalent of pass / fail rules and with a data set like VAERS you probably have time for a coffee before the full report is spat out.
You dont need to be a professor or PhD in some BS bio-esoterica to do this. Just have a firm grounding in the relevant maths. Actual understand it not just pass some 101 exam. And based on the quality of their published work having those "qualified people" qualifications seem to be a huge handicap in actually producing rigorous and reliable results.
You might be surprised just how common this problem is in an lot of science disciplines. Epidemic levels you might say, in the bio-sciences.
Have you done such an analysis?
How did you get information on batch sizes, that were used in the USA?
Are all batches of uniform size?
Is a whole batch actually used in the USA?
Is the whole batch used at all?
@95-protected
Why? Not my area of interest. Just said the analysis was doable from the public data and bad batches happen all the time.
I'll only get interested when it is taken up by the product liability lawyers. Which is most definitely my area of interest on this particular subject. Have a lot of experience proving very technical background and evidential material for very technical lawsuits just like those. Which all had successful conclusions I might add. In fact just preparing the legal equivalent of chum for the bottom feeder product liability lawyers in the US at the moment. This will be fun. Making the pubic heath charlatans pay for tier incompetence. At least in the US. You may have to wait a long longer in the UK for justice to be served.
Or............. it is a load of garbage misinformation.
How do you know this analysis is real?
Since the publisher says toxic many times per minute, he can hardly be considered to ne neutral.
It's hard to know what to make of this, if it is a ruse, it's a very elaborate one, he stock markets are not buying this ruse, Pfizer rose 3% today, Craig Paardekooper is a bit ignorant, he repeatedly say Pfizer is a German firm , in fact bioNtech, their partner in based in Mainz, but Pfizer is as American as pumkin pie.
My guess is it's a ruse to bump down the share price, maybe Craig shorted Pfizer, why else woulhe make this up(if itis fake)? Well he has a history of making things up , his you tube channel has vidoes on bogus cancer cures, and here he is spreading hogwash about magnetiv graphene in the vaccines.
https://rense.com/general96/graphene-oxide-is-toxic-to-human-blood.pdf
my guess is he's an attention seeker... but what do I know, if there is any truth in this, Pfizer's share price would be sure to drop through the floor.
So the objective of all this hogwash is to spread the idea that the vaccines contain graphene. At some day in the future, some Ernst Stavro Blofeld guy will send out a pulse of electro magnetic radiation that will cause all the vaccinated to drop dead. That much is said in the graphene paper and that the whole show is being conducted by the devil, the paper literally recommends that vaccinated people should wear a tin foil hat i.e. you would create /line a tent with 3 layers of aluminium foil. The vaccinated ones would sleep inside.
No this is not correct...... it will cause their blood to align with the field and everyone will point in the same direction. At least those in the norther hemisphere.. it will be the opposite in the south.
If people stand astride the equator, they will either be split in half, or rotate at immense speeds until they drill down to the earth's core. Opinion is split on which will happen.
You can find some experts on brandnewtube
Given the irresponsible haste in the roll out of these novel SARs CoV 2 vaccine types and the ramp up in manufacture in volumes several orders of magnitudes greater that for all previous attempts it hardly surprising that faulty batches should show up with far higher frequency than with long established and mature vaccine types.
And given that these novel vaccines need very strong adjuvants and use unproven delivery packaging which are strong immuno irritants its even less surprising that any problems tend to be toxicological rather than just one of being inert or ineffective. Which is a more typical problem with traditional vaccines.
Given the batches in question are not random in time, or level of toxicity (distinct levels) or by manufacturer, it does not suggest manufacturing faults which would be random across all 3 categories.
Don't feed the trolls, graphine has not been proven, to show this you'd have to go back to the orginal Spanish study commissioned by La Quinta Columna, an activist group, the study was quickly removed from the web being replaced by a disingenuous edited English translation after the TLAV interview trashed their claims, the only surviving copy I have found is shown on the TLAV interview with Whitney Webb, who is both fluent Spanish and worked in editing and translating scientific studies in Chile, the study clearly shows the professional lab they commissioned could not find the distinctive TEM pattern required to prove it was in the sample, even though they tried multiple attempts at finding it, they included a sample TEM pic from the literature of what would be required to prove it, this was subsiquently used in the all the english translations as if it was found in the sample, evey single claim I have examined for GO includes this picture as if it was found in the sample.
However the study, and a number of subsiquent microscopic studies have shown unknown contaminents, and some identified contaminents (stainless steel particles etc.) but the GO claim seems to have put a lot of researchers on a bum steer, it has still to be proven.
here is the Whitney Webb interview showing the study.
Why would you take such a source of information at face value?
It's amazing the energy that anti-vaxx nutters will go to to seek out this material.
Have you nothing better to do?
Posted by: @impobs
Have you still not wasted enough time with your hogwash?
graphene has not been proven, ...no TEM pattern, they included a sample TEM pic from the literature, the GO claim has put a lot of researchers on a bum steer
It's pure hogwash with Craig Paardekooper's name at the top, saying they obtained vials of the vaccine and tested them. They found that 99% was Graphene Oxide (GO). https://rense.com/general96/graphene-oxide-is-toxic-to-human-blood.pdf
So Craig Paardekooper promoted this elaborate GO scam, which you know has been busted, so now there is every reason to assume the patterns in the deployment of toxic covid vaccine batches story involving Craig Paardekooper is just another attention grabbing scam.
And are these nonsensical ideas of yours about unknown contaminants, and (stainless steel particles etc.) yet another try to prolong the attention grabbing scam?
you had very little credibility to start with, now you have none at all.
For anyone who can't work out the agenda these two idiots are spamming the forum with, here's a clue
https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2017/08/21/the-gentlepersons-guide-to-forum-spies/
Very pleased that opposition to your madcap posts makes you uncomfortable.
Why don't you form an argument to justify your case, which does not involve quoting an an-line misinformation source. Until you can do this, you can't have credibility.
Distraction, by insulting your opponents, also is not an argument.
Have a good think and see what you can come up with.
For anyone who can't work out the agenda these two idiots are spamming the forum
cheers but we know what impObs and jmc are up to.
