Or as Patriot Clips calls them, Comedian Murder Juice.
As more information comes to light, I don’t think it’s a good idea, we know risk to children is incredibly low.
I don’t think the scientific community was in agreement. The real disagreement only started to surface once they stopped censoring on social media. I mean they censored articles published by the British Medical Journal.
It was even difficult to find info on google, you really had to work hard to find any real info. They even dropped stats from official reporting like the UK vaccine surveillance report, once the data started to cast doubt on the official narrative.
New side effects are still being identified, because we had bad data to begin with, which is what the censored medical journal was trying to highlight, so it makes sense that things are still surfacing.
I remember reading in the original study a significant increase in the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis in young men among others (not the only side effect, just calling one out)
I don’t think risk = reward when it comes to children.
Have you considered reviewing your stance in light of recent research and investigations?
What if those children are in the heart of Africa.
It’s sad, because HCQ is used to treat malaria, which kills more kids than any virus, but we are still in the post Dr. Joe Rogan age where vast numbers believe HCQ was effective against COVID.
Again, the data and science we have to fight novel coronavirus is already on the CDC/WHO sites. If you’re an expert in this field, go write an article challenging that. Pumping it out here is just going to keep the meat grinder rolling.
If you want to label me a scaremonger for pointing to cases studies like this…once again, the plural of anecdotes is data.
This is 1/17400 of the cost, but only Nazis measure people by their systemic value. That’s why they tattooed Jews, it’s easy to let people die when they’re just a number.
It’s true. All of it.
yes we require no data, only anecdotes, because many anecdotes is data, so therefor my anecdotes can replace data, nazis look at data, humanitarians at anecdotes.
data = nazis therefor data is bad, got it.
1 Like
You clearly are not getting the Nobel Prize nominated value science and engineering research I was referencing there.
Seriously, exactly how much evil have you studied?
How much evil have I studied? lol
I come from a time when thankfully we’ve moved past scientific methods being considered evil. You should join me in this new time of enlightenment.
1 Like
The scientific method has provably evil applied science and engineering applications, and as AI adoption continues to grow it’s my sad duty to inform you it’s going to get better at it than we are because computer have no conscience or guilt complex.
You should really read up on Hartman to understand what I’m talking about. If you’d like a list of a dozen other founding scientists on these issues I’ll be glad to make a chart for you.
Bumped for science.