Covid Fraud Thread

Goodness gracious ...

From the article:

On Tuesday, the nation’s largest pediatrics association revealed that it is bucking guidance from Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) by recommending Covid shots for infants and young children. The advisement was included in the AAP’s newly released immunization schedule for all children under the age of 18.

“Infants and children 6 through 23 months of age are at the highest risk for severe COVID-19,” the APP claimed in its press release. “Given this, the AAP recommends a COVID-19 vaccine for all children ages 6 through 23 months old to help protect against serious illness. Children younger than 2 years old are especially vulnerable to severe COVID-19 and should be prioritized for vaccination unless they have a known allergy to the vaccine or its ingredients.”



Annual death rate for those under 30 is 0.000011. That includes the more lethal variants as well as what has been circulating the past 3 years...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ttucke11
Well, I definitely trust it more than I trust you, since you're 0 for 2 on the same fact.

The idea that you wouldn't use wikipedia at all is crazy. It's not 100%, but no source is. You have powers of discernment, right?
I ran across this and thought it may help answer some questions for you about who they are. Not my words.

 
Covid was real, it nearly killed me. THe Vax didn't save lives, it cost more lives and is likely still costing lives. You were less likely to survive COVID if you were triple vaxed then if you were not. Several reports and studies are now showing that. The shots weakened your immune system. Keep your head in the sands Huff you have thus far....
You probably just had the flu. Hey, I don't make light of the Flu, it kills plenty. Still the calculated mortality was still less than 0.5 percent. The big problem was the lie by big pharma that there were zero treatments for it. They had to make this lie in order to get indemnified by the government against any lawsuits. They falsified data to back up their lies. I mean, does this chart make any sense?

1755975607850.jpeg
 
You probably just had the flu. Hey, I don't make light of the Flu, it kills plenty. Still the calculated mortality was still less than 0.5 percent. The big problem was the lie by big pharma that there were zero treatments for it. They had to make this lie in order to get indemnified by the government against any lawsuits. They falsified data to back up their lies. I mean, does this chart make any sense?

View attachment 766345
My guy I was hospitalized 3 months total for COVID, and at one point given 48 hours to live. I kinda know the difference.
 
My guy I was hospitalized 3 months total for COVID, and at one point given 48 hours to live. I kinda know the difference.
I've seen flu take down some really healthy friends of mine over the years. I don't joke about it. My point is that in every flu season, there are 3, 4 or more different strains going around. You can take a test to show you have a flu, but you never know which one you have. Glad you made it.
 
I've seen flu take down some really healthy friends of mine over the years. I don't joke about it. My point is that in every flu season, there are 3, 4 or more different strains going around. You can take a test to show you have a flu, but you never know which one you have. Glad you made it.

The guy is telling you that he had COVID and was diagnosed by doctors with COVID and almost died over the course of 2 months because of COVID and you're over here stumping that he "probably had the flu."

I've had the flu a few times. I'm sure it was just a wild coincidence that I had the worst flu of my life with entirely new symptoms in 2020 that laid me out harder than any flu I had prior to that.
 
The guy is telling you that he had COVID and was diagnosed by doctors with COVID and almost died over the course of 2 months because of COVID and you're over here stumping that he "probably had the flu."

I've had the flu a few times. I'm sure it was just a wild coincidence that I had the worst flu of my life with entirely new symptoms in 2020 that laid me out harder than any flu I had prior to that.
Read a book.
covid is Flu just like a bass is a fish. There are no tests to distinguish between the type you have. Only that you have Flu. And ANY flu can kill you under the right circumstances.

It's like hearing a knock on the door. You don't know who is there but you know that someone is there. Get it?
 
Read a book.
covid is Flu just like a bass is a fish. There are no tests to distinguish between the type you have. Only that you have Flu. And ANY flu can kill you under the right circumstances.

It's like hearing a knock on the door. You don't know who is there but you know that someone is there. Get it?

The sweet, juicy irony of you telling me to read a book in this instance is delicious.
 
The sweet, juicy irony of you telling me to read a book in this instance is delicious.
So I take it that you now understand and I don't have to explain any further? Good. Honestly, I just think you're trying to get a rise out of me. I really don't care either way.
 
First Population-Wide Peer-Reviewed Study Finds COVID-19 “Vaccines” Increase Risk of Multiple Cancers — CONFIRMS Fears of “Turbo Cancer” Epidemic | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hᴏft

First Population-Wide Peer-Reviewed Study Finds COVID-19 “Vaccines” Increase Risk of Multiple Cancers — CONFIRMS Fears of “Turbo Cancer” Epidemic​

by Jim Hᴏft Aug. 31, 2025 4:00 pm
A bombshell peer-reviewed study out of Italy has just shattered the narrative peddled by Big Pharma, corporate media, and government health bureaucrats.
For the first time, a population-wide cohort of nearly 300,000 people tracked over 30 months has revealed that the so-called “safe and effective” COVID-19 shots are linked to alarming spikes in multiple forms of cancer.
Researchers followed every resident aged 11 and older in Italy’s Pescara province from June 2021 through December 2023, examining hospital records and adjusting for age, sex, prior health conditions, and even prior COVID infection.

The researchers allegedly found that those who received at least one vaccine dose had a much lower risk of dying from any cause compared to the unvaccinated, and this protective effect was even stronger in people who had three or more doses.
When looking at cancer, the picture was less clear. People who had been vaccinated appeared somewhat more likely to be hospitalized with a new cancer diagnosis than those who were unvaccinated, particularly for cancers of the breast, bladder, and colon.
However, this increased risk was only evident in people who had never been infected with COVID-19, and it disappeared—or even reversed—when the analysis required at least twelve months to pass between vaccination and a hospital admission for cancer.
  • Hospitalizations for cancer were 35% higher in vaccinated individuals versus the unvaccinated (HR 1.23).
  • The link was strongest in men and in those with no prior COVID infection.
  • Overall Cancer Risk: +23% after just one dose
  • Breast Cancer: +54% risk after vaccination
  • Bladder Cancer: +62% increased risk
  • Colorectal Cancer: +35% increased risk
Even after multiple doses, the risks remained elevated across the board.

The authors noted that vaccinated individuals are usually healthier, wealthier, and more likely to get preventative care, a phenomenon called the “healthy vaccinee bias.”
If anything, the numbers should have shown lower cancer rates. Instead, cancers surged. That means the real danger could be far worse than what the data shows.
Doctors and whistleblowers have been warning for years about sudden, aggressive cancers appearing in otherwise healthy people after the jab.
This study, alongside more than 100 other peer-reviewed papers, confirms the link between mRNA injections and deadly cancer pathways. A new medical term has even been coined: COVID-19 Vaccine-Induced “Turbo Cancer.”
More from Focal Points:

THE FIRST FORMAL SIGNAL: INCREASED CANCER RISK​

Despite strong “healthy vaccinee bias” (explained below), the study still found multiple increases in cancer hospitalizations among vaccinated individuals.

Overall cancer risk:​

  • +23% increased risk after ≥1 dose (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11–1.37) (statistically significant)
  • +9% increased risk after ≥3 doses (HR 1.09, 95% CI 1.02–1.16) (statistically significant)

BY CANCER SITE (Hazard Ratios Converted to % Increased Risk)​

Breast cancer
  • +54% with ≥1 dose (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.10–2.16) (statistically significant)
  • +36% with ≥3 doses (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.08–1.72) (statistically significant)
Bladder cancer
  • +62% with ≥1 dose (HR 1.62, 95% CI 1.07–2.45) (statistically significant)
  • +43% with ≥3 doses (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.08–1.88) (statistically significant)
Colon-rectum cancer
  • +35% with ≥1 dose (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.01–1.80) (statistically significant)
  • +14% with ≥3 doses (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.96–1.36) (not statistically significant)
Hematological cancers (leukemia/lymphoma)
  • +31% with ≥1 dose (HR 1.31, 95% CI 0.96–1.79) (not statistically significant)
  • +7% with ≥3 doses (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.89–1.29) (not statistically significant)
Uterine cancer
  • +77% with ≥1 dose (HR 1.77, 95% CI 0.76–4.13) (not statistically significant)
  • +20% with ≥3 doses (HR 1.20, 95% CI 0.73–1.96) (not statistically significant)
Ovarian cancer
  • +71% with ≥1 dose (HR 1.71, 95% CI 0.60–4.82) (not statistically significant)
  • +86% with ≥3 doses (HR 1.86, 95% CI 0.68–5.12) (not statistically significant)
Thyroid cancer
  • +58% with ≥1 dose (HR 1.58, 95% CI 0.84–2.99) (not statistically significant)
  • -3% with ≥3 doses (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.67–1.45) (not statistically significant)
Prostate cancer
  • +1% with ≥1 dose (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.68–1.49) (not statistically significant)
  • -3% with ≥3 doses (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.76–1.23) (not statistically significant)
Lung cancer
  • -10% with ≥1 dose (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68–1.18) (not statistically significant)
  • -7% with ≥3 doses (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.79–1.11) (not statistically significant)
WHAT THIS MEANS
  • The strongest, statistically significant increases were found for breast, bladder, colorectal, and overall cancer risk.
  • Nearly all other cancer sites also showed an upward trend, though not statistically significant due to wide confidence intervals.
  • Only lung and prostate cancers showed no evidence of increased risk.
This pattern suggests a real signal that is partially obscured by confounders and limited follow-up time.
Read the data below:

Full Study

Many regrets now I'll wager.
 
Screenshot 2025-09-02 194805.png
not unrelated. Helps reverse damage of MRNA shot. it helps with long term issues with clotting, and blockages, sadly it will do little for the contamination of Carcinogens etc.
 
Last edited:

Wow.

Read all about Ivermectin in the article.

We were lied to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol
RFK Jr. gonna give us "answers" on autism soon. Hope he can top the Epstein answers the administration promised!
 
Did they slug your renal system with Remdesivir and put you on a vent? The algorithm they used on this virus killed as many as the virus.
Nope had I been taken to the OTHER hospital downtown that is what they would have done, and I would be dead. I also was lucky in that i had the last available bipap, and I had it on maximum pressure. Without that pibab i'd have gone to the vent, and I almost still did. At the other larger hospital they all went with the cdc death protocol. Remdesivir is poinson, and any doctor who spent even a short time studying it's history would know this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jxn Vol
Covid was real, it nearly killed me. THe Vax didn't save lives, it cost more lives and is likely still costing lives. You were less likely to survive COVID if you were triple vaxed then if you were not. Several reports and studies are now showing that. The shots weakened your immune system. Keep your head in the sands Huff you have thus far....

This is unequivocally false information.
 
Advertisement

Back
Top