ecosophia | Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 56

As we move further into the second year of these open posts, it's pretty clear that the official narrative is cracking as the toll of deaths and injuries from the Covid vaccines rises steadily and the vaccines themselves demonstrate their total uselesness at preventing Covid infection or transmission. It's still important to keep watch over the mis-, mal- and nonfeasance of our self-proclaimed health gruppenfuehrers, and the disastrous results of the Covid mania, but I think it's also time to begin thinking about what might be possible as the existing medical industry reels under the impact of its own self-inflicted injuries.

So it's time for another open post. The rules are the same as before:

1. If you plan on parroting the party line of the medical industry and its paid shills, please go away. This is a place for people to talk openly, honestly, and freely about their concerns that the party line in question is dangerously flawed and that actions being pushed by the medical industry et al. are causing injury and death. It is not a place for you to dismiss those concerns. Anyone who wants to hear the official story and the arguments in favor of it can find those on hundreds of thousands of websites.

2. If you plan on insisting that the current situation is the result of a deliberate plot by some villainous group of people or other, please go away. There are tens of thousands of websites currently rehashing various conspiracy theories about the Covid-19 outbreak and the vaccines. This is not one of them. What we're exploring is the likelihood that what's going on is the product of the same arrogance, incompetence, and corruption that the medical industry and its tame politicians have displayed so abundantly in recent decades. That possibility deserves a space of its own for discussion, and that's what we're doing here.

3. If you plan on using rent-a-troll derailing or disruption tactics, please go away. I'm quite familiar with the standard tactics used by troll farms to disrupt online forums, and am ready, willing, and able -- and in fact quite eager -- to ban people permanently for engaging in them here. Oh, and I also lurk on other Covid-19 vaccine skeptic blogs, so I'm likely to notice when the same posts are showing up on more than one venue.

4. If you don't believe in treating people with common courtesy, please go away. I have, and enforce, a strict courtesy policy on my blogs and online forums, and this is no exception. The sort of schoolyard bullying that takes place on so many other internet forums will get you deleted and banned here. No, I don't care if you disagree with that: my journal, my rules.

With that said, the floor is open for discussion.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/regulatory-approval-of-pfizer-biontech-vaccine-for-covid-19/summary-public-assessment-report-for-pfizerbiontech-covid-19-vaccine

As far as I can tell, this is just a report, and does not (yet) represent an actual change in policy-- though I'd love to hear from actual UK residents on that, in case you're hearing different. But you might recall that UKHSA has been really gung-ho up til now about the shots being extremely safe and effective and recommended for everybody, including women who are pregnant or nursing. To find the relevant bit in that wall of obfuscation and Somnoleseian text, ctrl+F for "pregnant". It says:

"The absence of reproductive toxicity data is a reflection of the speed of development to first identify and select COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 for clinical testing and its rapid development to meet the ongoing urgent health need. In principle, a decision on licensing a vaccine could be taken in these circumstances without data from reproductive toxicity studies animals, but there are studies ongoing and these will be provided when available. In the context of supply under Regulation 174, it is considered that sufficient reassurance of safe use of the vaccine in pregnant women cannot be provided at the present time: however, use in women of childbearing potential could be supported provided healthcare professionals are advised to rule out known or suspected pregnancy prior to vaccination. Women who are breastfeeding should also not be vaccinated. These judgements reflect the absence of data at the present time and do not reflect a specific finding of concern. Adequate advice with regard to women of childbearing potential, pregnant women and breastfeeding women has been provided in both the Information for UK Healthcare Professionals and the Information for UK recipients."

---TL:DR: We don't have enough info to say that this is safe for pregnant or breastfeeding women, so we recommend against it for those women.

What changed?

On the surface, nothing's changed. If they don't have that data now, they certainly didn't have it back when they were merrily shooting up pregnant ladies.

But this is the UK we're talking about. Their national health system keeps *meticulous* data, and the shots have been going for a year or more, in the childbearing-age population.

So if anything, they have vastly *more* data on this now, than they had last year, when it was all go go go, safeandeffective, you're a bad person if you don't do it.

Clearly, something has changed. They're just not saying what.

Just a personal hunch: combine this with stuff Tucker's finally been permitted to say, the shift to Blame Trump, the mad scramble going on at the CDC, the Fauci ouster...

I think the next few weeks could be very lively.

TDS dont lie. If they're setting up Trump, they means they know for sure its double plus bad. Bad omen. 349k excess us deaths according to the sites linked here...that's a bunch. Non covid but otherwise a huge mystery...hmmmm. Celadon

Bad bet nothing stuck to Trump, even the last FBI raid was a flop

Although something about the webpage was changed just a few weeks ago, the summary was last updated in June 2021 and apparently was mostly prepared in 2020. That's not new text; it's the text that was there all along.

Oh, yikes! So this was there all along, and they recommended it anyway??

That seems.... legally actionable.

Yes! Press release Nov 2021: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pregnant-women-urged-to-get-covid-19-vaccine-following-new-uk-safety-data

Sigh. "The Science" would work better if "the doctors" actually read it.

you say "something about the webpage was changed just a few weeks ago," and then "the text that was there all along."

how, if i may ask, did the webpage change? i'm the opposite of computer savvy. so i'm curious about this change, and not trying to be a jerk.

inquiring minds want to know. i am grateful for each and every time someone carries "this mushroom" into the sunlight of understanding, even if just for a minute or two.

p coyle,

I've been meaning to ask for months now, what is the text in your image? Can you link a larger version of the comic?

I always feel like it would be rude to reply to one of your posts with this question, but I want to know every time I read one of your posts.

Thanks, and sorry for the digression.

I'm not p_coyle, but I do know what the cartoon is.

Image: A man in a tattered business suit is sitting around a campfire with three children, all wearing tattered clothes. There's a ruined city in the distance.

Text: "Yes, the planet got destroyed, but for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders."

that's the one!

and team10tim, i would have taken no offense and been happy to explain. i was kinda bummed out that it wasn't all that legible.

Edited 2022-09-02 04:50 (UTC)

As another post says, this is actually from 2020, something was updated in august but who knows what. You can check the wayback machine and see that the text you are referring to is the same back then. This of course doesn't change the fact that there seems to be no indication why the advice changed later on to "Safe and effective in pregnant "people"" No extra safety data seems to have come out so basically someone somewhere just decided it was fine on a whim.

Thanks for the heads-up. It is extremely easy to rake in information that seems to support one's biases, and miss details like that! I am as guilty as anyone.

Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 56

UK changing tune for pregnant/nursing mums?

Re: UK changing tune for pregnant/nursing mums?

Re: UK changing tune for pregnant/nursing mums?

Re: UK changing tune for pregnant/nursing mums?

Re: UK changing tune for pregnant/nursing mums?

Re: UK changing tune for pregnant/nursing mums?

Re: UK changing tune for pregnant/nursing mums?

Re: UK changing tune for pregnant/nursing mums?

Re: UK changing tune for pregnant/nursing mums?

Off topic tangent

Re: Off topic tangent

Re: Off topic tangent

Re: UK changing tune for pregnant/nursing mums?

Re: UK changing tune for pregnant/nursing mums?