Still not safe, Still not effective....

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Originally Posted by gladi8r

....(and WHY would NPR know ICD-10 codes? Especially fake ones. That's a bizarre comment)

Why wouldn't a government funded news source know about ICD-10 Codes? Hmmm.. probably because they don't want to would be my guess. There are thousands of them, for some of the weirdest things even. Yet, one to code a sudden death after the covid vaxxination does not exist. Why indeed.

Could the lack thereof be intentional to avoid disclosing the number of complications and death post-vaxx-o? Indeed worth considering....

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by gladi8r

Tell me how you KNOW this. Where are your facts there?

I lived through the scamdemic, I know thats what was done because I remember living through it. A person was NOT considered Fully vaccinated for COVID until two weeks after the second dose. If a person died before that they were LEGALLY considered unvaccinated. You either were or you weren't fully vaccinated. So any that died 10 days after their 2nd jab was considered to be unvaccinated and that's how their deaths were recorded. Was your head in the sand back in 2021/22?

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by texassapper

nothing you wrote invalidates the VAERS database. It's not a validated cause and effect correlation... but where there is smoke, there is fire.

The simple fact is, the govt., FDA etc, have no interest in whether the jab is killing people. In fact they are doing there level best to supress any information to that effect. That ought to concern you. But as I've said before, you will believe eventuially.

Your second paragraph is unproven BS.

Regarding your first paragraph, you still need PROOF to support your allegations that there is a correlation between the shot and the deaths. There is none.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by texassapper

I lived through the scamdemic, I know thats what was done because I remember living through it. A person was NOT considered Fully vaccinated for COVID until two weeks after the second dose. If a person died before that they were LEGALLY considered unvaccinated. You either were or you weren't fully vaccinated. So any that died 10 days after their 2nd jab was considered to be unvaccinated and that's how their deaths were recorded. Was your head in the sand back in 2021/22?

Do you have any data as to how many people died from Covid in the 2 week period after getting the second dose? My guess is that it is an impossible number to come up with. Pure speculation depending on what you want to prove.

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Do you have any data as to how many people died from Covid in the 2 week period after getting the second dose? My guess is that it is an impossible number to come up with. Pure speculation depending on what you want to prove.

That's precisely my point. It's not just the 2 weeks after the 2nd shot, it's the time between 1st shot death. Which is a possible span of several months.

And we have no idea how many fall into that category because until the 2 weeks passed from the 2nd shot, they were considered UNVAXXED... as if they had never had a single jab.

[gladi8r]

Originally Posted by gladi8r

....(and WHY would NPR know ICD-10 codes? Especially fake ones. That's a bizarre comment)

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Why wouldn't a government funded news source know about ICD-10 Codes? Hmmm.. probably because they don't want to would be my guess....

Yup. You finally got one right. They don't want to know anything about ICD-10 Codes....because....they aren't part of the health services community!

I believe I've seen you (mis)quote Occam before. I hesitate to give the trite, misused populist version of the "philosophy" any more exposure. But the reason it has become so cliche is the reason many do, i.e. it is often correct. And it is the explanation here. NPR has nothing whatsoever to do with Diagnosis Codes used by the medical community. Your connection is bizarre.

I'm tempted to suggest you stay on topic. But that would be ineffective. Between your limitless ability to justify your baffling non-sequiturs and the...let's call it..inconsistent... enforcement of forum rules by Mods, you will continue to say anything that pops into your head.

This is all the time you get on a day for family. Stand back and stand by!

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by texassapper

That's precisely my point. It's not just the 2 weeks after the 2nd shot, it's the time between 1st shot death. Which is a possible span of several months.

And we have no idea how many fall into that category because until the 2 weeks passed from the 2nd shot, they were considered UNVAXXED... as if they had never had a single jab.

Anyone who has not gotten the 2nd shot and waited 2 weeks is in fact not vaccinated against Covid. Same goes for any other vaccination - there is always a short waiting period before the vaccine (and let's not argue whether or not the Covid shot is a vaccine) becomes effective. If a person dies from Covid in that interim period, they are unvaccinated.

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

If a person dies from Covid in that interim period, they are unvaccinated.

Which means that if the shots ARE causing death or injury, they won't be counted as vaxxed.

Again, you've just proven my point.

[texassapper]

[texassapper]

The State of Kansas outlines several specific allegations in its lawsuit:

1. Pfizer misled the public that it had a “safe and effective” COVID-19 vaccine.

2. Pfizer said its COVID-19 vaccine was safe even though it knew its COVID-19 vaccine was connected to serious adverse events, including myocarditis and pericarditis, failed pregnancies, and deaths. Pfizer concealed this critical safety information from the public.

3. Pfizer said its COVID-19 vaccine was effective even though it knew its COVID19 vaccine waned over time and did not protect against COVID-19 variants. Pfizer concealed this critical effectiveness information from the public.

4. Pfizer said its COVID-19 vaccine would prevent transmission of COVID-19 even though it knew it never studied the effect of its vaccine on transmission of COVID-19.

5. To keep the public from learning the truth, Pfizer worked to censor speech on social media that questioned Pfizer’s claims about its COVID-19 vaccine.

6. Pfizer’s misrepresentations of a “safe and effective” vaccine resulted in record company revenue of approximately $75 billion from COVID-19 vaccine sales in just two years.

7. Pfizer’s actions and statements relating to its COVID-19 vaccine violated previous consent judgments with the State of Kansas.

8. Pfizer’s actions and statements relating to its COVID-19 vaccine violated the Kansas Consumer Protection Act, K.S.A. 50-623 et seq., regardless of whether any individual consumer ultimately received Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.

9. Pfizer must be held accountable for falsely representing the benefits of its COVID19 vaccine while concealing and suppressing the truth about its vaccine’s safety risks, waning effectiveness, and inability to prevent transmission.

Pfizer is also accused of suggesting its vaccine prevented COVID-19 transmission despite admitting it had not studied whether its vaccine halted transmission.

[Michael8219]

Originally Posted by texassapper

I have a family member that had a stroke a little more than 2 weeks after booster shot in fall 2022 - mid 40s, female. We all believe it was attributable to the jab but it was not entered into VAERS.

She’s about 95% recovered but it took being out of work 3 months plus and a lot of physical and occupational therapy.

A brother-in-law had a stent put in after the jab. Yes he was in his late 60s but thin and in better shape than me. He would walk in the mountains and only got the jab to travel to US to see his son, daughter, and grandchildren.

But all of this anecdotal evidence doesn’t get captured and doctors can’t make a direct connection. I was born at night, just not last night!

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Well dang! Ya beat me to it. Odd to as Kansas has been kinda Lefty-Lucy politically of late, even though most in the state are very conservative.

Originally Posted by texassapper

The State of Kansas outlines several specific allegations in its lawsuit:

1. Pfizer misled the public that it had a “safe and effective” COVID-19 vaccine.

2. Pfizer said its COVID-19 vaccine was safe even though it knew its COVID-19 vaccine was connected to serious adverse events, including myocarditis and pericarditis, failed pregnancies, and deaths. Pfizer concealed this critical safety information from the public.

3. Pfizer said its COVID-19 vaccine was effective even though it knew its COVID19 vaccine waned over time and did not protect against COVID-19 variants. Pfizer concealed this critical effectiveness information from the public.

4. Pfizer said its COVID-19 vaccine would prevent transmission of COVID-19 even though it knew it never studied the effect of its vaccine on transmission of COVID-19.

5. To keep the public from learning the truth, Pfizer worked to censor speech on social media that questioned Pfizer’s claims about its COVID-19 vaccine.

6. Pfizer’s misrepresentations of a “safe and effective” vaccine resulted in record company revenue of approximately $75 billion from COVID-19 vaccine sales in just two years.

7. Pfizer’s actions and statements relating to its COVID-19 vaccine violated previous consent judgments with the State of Kansas.

8. Pfizer’s actions and statements relating to its COVID-19 vaccine violated the Kansas Consumer Protection Act, K.S.A. 50-623 et seq., regardless of whether any individual consumer ultimately received Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.

9. Pfizer must be held accountable for falsely representing the benefits of its COVID19 vaccine while concealing and suppressing the truth about its vaccine’s safety risks, waning effectiveness, and inability to prevent transmission.

Pfizer is also accused of suggesting its vaccine prevented COVID-19 transmission despite admitting it had not studied whether its vaccine halted transmission.

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Originally Posted by gladi8r

...They don't want to know anything about ICD-10 Codes....because....they aren't part of the health services community!...

I wanted to address this particular topic directly as it is one of the core problems regarding the collusion around the covid - IMMHO. The rest of the poster's diatribe seems to have been addressed.

ICD-10 codes are the beating heart of the Medical Billing Industrial Complex. Don't have the right ICD-10 code on your billing statement? No money hunny, from your insurance company (period). I supply links to previous posts about them below.

But the idea that a "news" source would be incurious about what they are and how they play is quite unsettling. Why wouldn't they want to know if they are reporting on pretty much anything medical related? Or is it a case of they are incompetent and actually do not they exist at all? Neither is a good look.

So what we have here appears to be a government funded news source that is either incompetent or incurious (both most likely), regurgitating information for/from the government, i.e. running cover for them. Politburo? Pravda? And the sheeples lap it up as gospel?!? Talk about reality detachment?!?

Learn to discern the difference between a conspiracy theory and an ICD-10 Z28.310 for Pete's sake

Source up your ICD-10 Z28.310

<insert pithy title here>

The Olympic medals of Crazy-Funny ICD-10 codes from Leo Hohmann's article

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by texassapper

Which means that if the shots ARE causing death or injury, they won't be counted as vaxxed.

Again, you've just proven my point.

There is absolutely no proof to support your statement that the Covid shot might be killing or harming people in the interim period between receiving the shot and it taking effect. They may die due to Covid in the interim 2 week period but there is absolutely no proof that the shot killed them or anyone else since it became available, other than 3 early on due to reactions to the Moderna vaccine, if I remember correctly

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by texassapper

How many ridiculous claims like this are you going to post and I debunk before you give it up? You see an article that supports your POV and post it without even thinking about researching it.

"US embalmer baselessly links clots to Covid-19 vaccines"

"A video shared on social media features an interview with an embalmer who claims he has seen an increasing number of bodies with unusual blood clots due to the Covid-19 vaccines. But experts say there is no data connecting the anecdotal observation to the shots, and the vials seen in the clip are not clearly identifiable.
"Strange blood clots found in MOST bodies is very disturbing. They were not sure whether it is being caused by COVID, the Vaccine or something else but now they think its caused by the vaccine," says a September 11, 2022 tweet.

The post includes a video of an interview with an American embalmer named Richard Hirschman who says clots are found in "50 to 70 percent of bodies."

https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.32JG7UE