thanks again for your wonderful and patient and deep analysis of all the madnesses and bluster that are generated by those advocating jabbing pregnant mums; I doubt even in their very old age that they will ever gain insight into what they have just done; so much of our world seems to have descended into blind advocacy; it feels like June 1914; will it take terrible destruction to wash some or much of this away?
I watched this yesterday https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EK3diXgqbI various interesting insights on how facts and truth are just ignored in the UK civil service; ("don't tell me facts; my beliefs are stronger" it seems .....
We all should be so grateful to Carl and Tom for their measure, calm and forensic approach to analysing these documents. I am an academic surgeon so my knowledge of Health Economics based on collaborations I have had with different teams over the years. It seems that the methodology is not quite standardised so that one can get different outcomes depending on the team doing the work. Seems a perfect exclude to withdraw the recommendation. There was so much fear - I well remember when I was on COVID vaccination duty advising a pregnant lady to not go ahead because there was no safety evidence. She did not take well to this (understandably in a way) because she had steeled herself up to have the vaccination. It is staggering that the NHS still refuse to answer to parliament in terms of problems from the vaccines and deaths in particular related to numbers of vaccines for "commercial sensitivity" - still perhaps a job at Moderna or Pfizer beckons...
Yes I agree, this substack is consistently careful and forensic.
"It is staggering that the NHS still refuse to answer to parliament in terms of problems from the vaccines and deaths in particular.." Agreed, but maybe the Americans will prize the truth out of them in the end.
"if you do not know what you are doing, sit on your hands until you do."
so well said;
we used to tell folks
"don't just do something, stand there": and "you do know you are allowed to stop and think, don't you?"
"No document that we consulted while writing mentioned potential harm."
anyone that can avoid mentioning potential harm by therapies in pregnancy: misguided? ignorant? delusional? wicked? crazy? criminal? .. each to their own.
"This is vital in pregnant women, as there are no published trials."
"Therefore, we do not have reliable information; "
"we only have observational studies, which are well-known sources of bias. "
so we have "a man down at the pub told me .." level of attempted reporting
self-styled academics advocating pregnant mums passionately advocating a re-run of thalidomide ....... in gobsmacking blindness ..
and all the tragic tales of stillbirths, foetal abnormalities etc etc are all hidden; so called "health" departments refusing to release data and certainly cancer data.
I well remember when the info started to trickle out of Israel "our real world lab" as Bourla the Vet remarked, about the sky high numbers of miscarriages and still births in jabbed women....we'll never know the truth.
thanks; great to have all this overlap and collaboration; a single soul can't remember all: all around, we hear of miscarriages and still births; those women who are studying this; and denying what we all see and hear; ........ well ...........
How come, when I was pregnant I had to avoid the following on pain of death: runny eggs, seafood (not a problem 🤢), soft cheese, coffee, ibuprofen, alcohol, etc - but now the medical establishment are desperate to shove a by now widely known to be toxic jab into every pregnant woman on the chuffing planet? Just vile.
“dont’ confuse the Minister with facts” (Sir Humphrey Appleby)
thanks again for your wonderful and patient and deep analysis of all the madnesses and bluster that are generated by those advocating jabbing pregnant mums; I doubt even in their very old age that they will ever gain insight into what they have just done; so much of our world seems to have descended into blind advocacy; it feels like June 1914; will it take terrible destruction to wash some or much of this away?
I watched this yesterday https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EK3diXgqbI various interesting insights on how facts and truth are just ignored in the UK civil service; ("don't tell me facts; my beliefs are stronger" it seems .....
We all should be so grateful to Carl and Tom for their measure, calm and forensic approach to analysing these documents. I am an academic surgeon so my knowledge of Health Economics based on collaborations I have had with different teams over the years. It seems that the methodology is not quite standardised so that one can get different outcomes depending on the team doing the work. Seems a perfect exclude to withdraw the recommendation. There was so much fear - I well remember when I was on COVID vaccination duty advising a pregnant lady to not go ahead because there was no safety evidence. She did not take well to this (understandably in a way) because she had steeled herself up to have the vaccination. It is staggering that the NHS still refuse to answer to parliament in terms of problems from the vaccines and deaths in particular related to numbers of vaccines for "commercial sensitivity" - still perhaps a job at Moderna or Pfizer beckons...
Yes I agree, this substack is consistently careful and forensic.
"It is staggering that the NHS still refuse to answer to parliament in terms of problems from the vaccines and deaths in particular.." Agreed, but maybe the Americans will prize the truth out of them in the end.
"if you do not know what you are doing, sit on your hands until you do."
so well said;
we used to tell folks
"don't just do something, stand there": and "you do know you are allowed to stop and think, don't you?"
"No document that we consulted while writing mentioned potential harm."
anyone that can avoid mentioning potential harm by therapies in pregnancy: misguided? ignorant? delusional? wicked? crazy? criminal? .. each to their own.
"This is vital in pregnant women, as there are no published trials."
"Therefore, we do not have reliable information; "
"we only have observational studies, which are well-known sources of bias. "
so we have "a man down at the pub told me .." level of attempted reporting
self-styled academics advocating pregnant mums passionately advocating a re-run of thalidomide ....... in gobsmacking blindness ..
and all the tragic tales of stillbirths, foetal abnormalities etc etc are all hidden; so called "health" departments refusing to release data and certainly cancer data.
I well remember when the info started to trickle out of Israel "our real world lab" as Bourla the Vet remarked, about the sky high numbers of miscarriages and still births in jabbed women....we'll never know the truth.
thanks; great to have all this overlap and collaboration; a single soul can't remember all: all around, we hear of miscarriages and still births; those women who are studying this; and denying what we all see and hear; ........ well ...........
Just saw on C.4 +1 an NHS ad encouraging uptake for Covid and Flu vaccines + nasal sprays for 2-3 year olds….AAAGH!
I hear them every time we put Greatest Hits Radio on in the car (hubs car, I listen to playlist in mine - no annoying jab ads).
How come, when I was pregnant I had to avoid the following on pain of death: runny eggs, seafood (not a problem 🤢), soft cheese, coffee, ibuprofen, alcohol, etc - but now the medical establishment are desperate to shove a by now widely known to be toxic jab into every pregnant woman on the chuffing planet? Just vile.