https://philharper.substac...
Without reservations I’m delighted to see a peer reviewed journal article showing the jabs don’t work (they hurt more than they save).
But, I’ve noticed a large number of huge changes from all over, all sharing one characteristic: they’re critical of the Covid19 💉 in a particular way.
This is in my view a deliberate, planned depressurisation by the perpetrators. Presumably they’ve rehearsed this part, too.
Taken together, a parsimonious explanation is they’re beginning to nail shut the coffin lid on the covid fraud.
They know what’s coming. And the timing of coming out of covid is imminent.
Best wishes
Mike
Without reservations I’m delighted to see a peer reviewed journal article showing the jabs don’t work (they hurt more than they save).
But, I’ve noticed a large number of huge changes from all over, all sharing one characteristic: they’re critical of the Covid19 💉 in a particular way.
This is in my view a deliberate, planned depressurisation by the perpetrators. Presumably they’ve rehearsed this part, too.
Taken together, a parsimonious explanation is they’re beginning to nail shut the coffin lid on the covid fraud.
They know what’s coming. And the timing of coming out of covid is imminent.
Best wishes
Mike
Peer Reviewed: Vaccine trial data shows a negative benefit to harm ratio
Put simply, both the Moderna and the Pfizer vaccine trial data appeared to have a negative benefit/harm ratio. I suspected that such a finding wouldn’t find its way into a peer-reviewed journal, but as of yesterday, that’s exactly what happened. Below is one of the key findings
https://philharper.substack.com/p/peer-reviewed-vaccine-trial-data
04:23 AM - Sep 02, 2022
Only people mentioned by Ailgaard in this post can reply
