It's pretty standard for a research study to have a control group, it's sort of fundamental to the scientific method. People would criticize the paper if they didn't have one.

But you realize that that's not always possible right?

Like if the study is looking at autopsy results from people under 30 who died from cardiac arrest, you can't just go and kill people to dissect their hearts-- that would be unethical, so sometimes they have to make do with what they have.

Sure, but in this case it looks like they didn't have too big a problem finding a control group.

But, if you thought you found something interesting, you would go look at another 30. And then another 30. All the while controlling for various other risk factors that could skew the data.

I mean I hope that in 2023 they already have an understanding of what healthy hearts look like, but you do you.

Pretty sure most medical researchers would say it’s still important to include control samples in cardiac studies in 2023.

I was shocked to learn that the USA still requires a vaccination to travel into it unless your a migrant coming across the border

They are still doing random checks on travelers . Ignoring the science baffles me

It's not migrants. It's people with immigrant status.

There is a bill in Congress some republican just introduced to eliminate it.

That can be tough though. There's a serious problem of finding more the more you look.

BSE was a classic example of this. One of the reasons some massively overestimated the risk was looking so hard for it.

Observational Findings of PULS Cardiac Test Findings for Inflammatory Markers in Patients Receiving mRNA Vaccines

Here is the abstract to the study that has you all clamoring for a control group.

This clinic has been using the PULS Cardiac Test (Predictive Health Diagnostics Co., Irvine, CA) a clinically utilized measurement of multiple protein biomarkers, which generates a score predicting the 5 yr risk (percentage chance) of a new Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) called the PULS Score. The score is based on changes from the norm of multiple protein inflammatory biomarkers including IL-16, a proinflammatory cytokine, soluble Fas, an inducer of apoptosis, and Hepatocyte Growth Factor (HGF) which serves as a marker for chemotaxis of T-cells into epithelium and cardiac tissue, among other markers. Elevation above the norm increases the PULS score, while decreases below the norm lowers the PULS score. The PULS score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years. Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, we tracked the changes of the PULS score and three of the inflammatory markers it measures in all of our patients consecutively receiving these vaccines.

They've been scoring patients using this metric for 8 years.

I don't know enough about this to know if it's meaningful though, and they seem to be skipping over some details that would help determine that. Such as, did other patients have similar increases in the same time? Did these increases sustain? Were there more cardiac events in this group?

Their results certainly suggest we need to investigate more, but just showing an increase in some markers at one point in time, especially without a control group, isn't particularly meaningful.

For all your concerns over this data and its meaningfulness, just keep in mind Pfizer, Moderna and the CDC have shown no data showing their vaccines are safe, despite making such claims, and are actively fighting tooth and nail in court to make sure what secret data they have doesn't comes out.

It is not like this study is refuting a Pfizer study showing no inflammatory biomarker issues with the vaccine. This study is attempting to fill the giant vacuum of non-information our establishment has produced so far.

So Project Veritas got themselves a Pfizer exec and what he says is pretty wild, although it isn't clear if Pfizer is actually working to create more virulent strains or just talking about doing it

the damage this pandemic has done is uncountable. I estimate the number of destroyed lifes is bigger than covid deaths.

again I have to point out cancer patients who missed treatments, my friends father is dead now because of discontiued treatments according to my friend. we just have to trust him here imo. Schools in the Phillipines locked down for 2 years! what consequences this will bring is incalculable.


youtuber musician dead now at 22. her father said they returned to Australia broken due to the pandemic:
https://www.nme.com/en_au/news/music...-at-22-3178633


"that we have been fighting since we got her back from America through emergency repatriation DFAT [Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade] but broken,” Schofield wrote on Facebook."

that means the pandemic is at fault again, right? and I don't mean the virus of course I mean the lockdowns.

how do you think a 22 year old feels when she can't go anywhere? see her friends? that's psychological torture for a teen and young adults. and not only them.

Why don't we just mutate it ourselves?': 'Director of research at Pfizer' reveals in undercover footage firm is exploring manipulating COVID to make it 'more potent' by infecting monkeys to create new vaccines

The Daily Mail wrote a story on the Veritas stuff then deleted it.

You completely misrepresent the article about the musician. Her dad said nothing about her being broken by the pandemic. He said she was broken from fighting her demons. In other articles, she talks about her severe depression from having a miscarriage a year ago; from finding out her fertility may have been negatively affected by earlier eating disorders; she had a drug addiction at times. Those are what "broke" her.

Don't trivialize someones death by ascribing it to not being to go out and see her friends.

I read all of that.
my opinion is that her demons got increased by the last 3 years. it did so for a lot of people. it didn't make it better for sure. how much it contributed to her death is matter of opinion imo. her father said the procedure brought her back broken. why would he even mention that is my question if he is not mad about it.
how much mental conditions worsened in the last 3 years is under research now.

you were right last time and I apologize. I will do so officially in the mod thread if that's fine by you.

I saw that. I wonder why they deleted it. DM normally doesn't suppress Project Veritas stories like the leftist MSM does. I checked and it is still all over Twitter.

I don't think we should have any allusions about either the Daily Mail or Twitter being some beacons of freedom.

It gets pretty complicated really quickly, but the ruling class will do all of these horrible things and then intentionally expose some of it at the same time-- they're playing a much longer game than most people can envision, but they want people upset and clamoring for reform-- which they of course will be happy to deliver.

But why in this instance the DM would post and then delete that story idk either.

This is pretty handy for folks who enjoy unfalsifiable conspiracy stories.

People love talking about "falsifiability' as if society can be reduced to the level of physics experiments. It doesn't work that way though.

Twitter has now removed it from 'Trending'.

There is supposed to be more from Veritas released today I think.

Yes, people who think critically about the world use basic tools like that. It’s not just for particle physics!

And then there’s the conspiracists who pick and choose what to take seriously based on what they’ve already decided to believe.

You haven't really struck me as much of a critical thinker though but more like a person who gobbles up whatever narrative the ruling class is force feeding down the throats of people.

But the idea that falsifiability should be the approach used when formulating theories about the world is just lol. It's a bit more complicated than that. I could explain the approach to you but it's far beyond the scope of this thread.